Re: kmalloc

David Woodhouse (David.Woodhouse@mvhi.com)
Mon, 25 Jan 1999 22:29:39 +0000

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Guest section DW: "Re: The Linux 64 GiB Limit - was: Re: oops! Should be fdisk broken?"
Previous message: Guest section DW: "The Linux 64 GiB Limit - was: Re: oops! Should be fdisk broken?"
Maybe in reply to: Frode Vatvedt Fjeld: "kmalloc"

davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com said:
> 1) Set include/asm/scatterlist.h:ISA_DMA_THRESHOLD and
> include/asm/dma.h:MAX_DMA_ADDRESS appropriately for your
> architecture.

Does that still retain the protection for ISA DMA? We need two separate DMA
limits - one for ISA, one for PCI32. They must both exist at the same time.

---- ---- ----
David Woodhouse David.Woodhouse@mvhi.com Office: (+44) 1223 810302
Project Leader, Process Information Systems Mobile: (+44) 976 658355
Axiom (Cambridge) Ltd., Swaffham Bulbeck, Cambridge, CB5 0NA, UK.
finger dwmw2@ferret.lmh.ox.ac.uk for PGP key.

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

Next message: Guest section DW: "Re: The Linux 64 GiB Limit - was: Re: oops! Should be fdisk broken?"
Previous message: Guest section DW: "The Linux 64 GiB Limit - was: Re: oops! Should be fdisk broken?"
Maybe in reply to: Frode Vatvedt Fjeld: "kmalloc"