From: "Dan Williams" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
To: "Haavard Skinnemoen" <haavard.skinnemoen@atmel.com>
Cc: "Atsushi Nemoto" <anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, maciej.sosnowski@intel.com,
ralf@linux-mips.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dmatest: flush and invalidate destination buffer before DMA
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 10:20:56 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e9c3a7c20901080920r1051775ey7dbb4fad37b2810@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090108093603.691c1200@hskinnemoen-d830>
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 1:36 AM, Haavard Skinnemoen
<haavard.skinnemoen@atmel.com> wrote:
> I think it does. The dmatest driver should definitely use
> DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL on the destination buffer to ensure that the poison
> values are written to RAM and not just written to cache and discarded.
>
True.
> Now, this probably means that the destination buffer must be _unmapped_
> with DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL too, which is difficult to do with the current
> asymmetrical API...
>
A map and unmap should work for the current platforms with dma
drivers, but you are right I think this is a violation of the api.
For correctness we would need the entire operation covered by
DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL to support platforms that may implement a dma bounce
buffer. Or, we could change dmatest to not go through the dma-memcpy
api, allowing dma_alloc to be used for the destination.
> In the general case, however, I think MIPS has a bug: I've seen drivers
> DMA to/from tiny buffers stored inside another struct. This is legal
> because the driver can guarantee that the other fields in the struct
> aren't accessed in the mean time, but any fields sharing a cacheline
> with the buffer must be written back before the lines are invalidated.
>
*nod*
--
Dan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-08 17:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-26 15:31 Atsushi Nemoto
2008-12-27 10:10 ` Haavard Skinnemoen
2008-12-28 17:53 ` Atsushi Nemoto
2009-01-05 18:31 ` Dan Williams
2009-01-06 1:14 ` Atsushi Nemoto
2009-01-06 1:29 ` Dan Williams
2009-01-06 2:06 ` Atsushi Nemoto
2009-01-08 4:43 ` Atsushi Nemoto
2009-01-08 8:36 ` Haavard Skinnemoen
2009-01-08 17:20 ` Dan Williams [this message]
2009-01-09 8:30 ` Atsushi Nemoto
2009-01-10 0:39 ` Dan Williams
2009-01-09 11:19 ` Ralf Baechle
2009-01-09 22:27 ` Russell King
2009-01-11 18:44 ` Ralf Baechle
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=e9c3a7c20901080920r1051775ey7dbb4fad37b2810@mail.gmail.com \
--to=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp \
--cc=haavard.skinnemoen@atmel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maciej.sosnowski@intel.com \
--cc=ralf@linux-mips.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome