Re: PATCH: Further aacraid work

[Jeff Garzik]

Alan Cox wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 09:10:43PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> > The AMD64 IOMMU could do it too (and the code to do it exists in
> > 2.6). But the problem is that the current IO layer doesn't provide a
> > sufficient fallback path when this fails. You have to promise in
> > advance that you can merge and then later it's too late to change your
> > mind without signalling an IO error.
>
>
> I would rather see it below the I/O layer for things like AMD64. The
> reason I say this is that many drivers would suffer from iommu merging not
> gain, and others may have limits.


This reminds me of good ole IDE:  the first-generation SATA controllers 
carry forward the limits of the older PCI IDE controllers:  neither the 
S/G table nor any single S/G entry may span a 64K boundary.

In theory the block layer / SCSI layer DMA boundary stuff takes care of 
this -- but iommu merging _undoes_ the segment splitting that the 
hardware _requires_.  Thus, in ata_fill_sg in libata-core.c, I re-split 
the S/G list after DMA-mapping it.  A bit lame.

James and BenH discussed a solution at the DMA level, but I don't think 
anything ever happened.

	Jeff


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/