Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1442308
| From | Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 16/20 v2] iommu/amd: Optimize map_sg and unmap_sg |
| Date | 2016-07-13 12:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rUpAw-1Nt-87@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <rSCs9-4e3-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <rSCsa-4e3-53@gated-at.bofh.it> <rU4cF-4gU-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <rU64N-5xF-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <rU7WV-6Ps-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 04:34:16PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote: > The boundary masks for block devices are tricky to track down through so > many layers of indirection in the common frameworks, but there are a lot > of 64K ones there. After some more impromptu digging into the subject > I've finally satisfied my curiosity - it seems this restriction stems > from the ATA DMA PRD table format, so it could perhaps still be a real > concern for anyone using some crusty old PCI IDE card in their modern > system. The boundary-mask is a capability of the underlying PCI device, no? The ATA or whatever-stack above should have no influence on it. > > Indeed, I wasn't suggesting making more than one call, just that > alloc_iova_fast() is quite likely to have to fall back to alloc_iova() > here, so there may be some mileage in going directly to the latter, with > the benefit of then being able to rely on find_iova() later (since you > know for sure you allocated out of the tree rather than the caches). My > hunch is that dma_map_sg() tends to be called for bulk data transfer > (block devices, DRM, etc.) so is probably a less contended path compared > to the network layer hammering dma_map_single(). Using different functions for allocation would also require special handling in the queued-freeing code, as I have to track the allocation then to know wheter I free it with the _fast variant or not. > > + mask = dma_get_seg_boundary(dev); > > + boundary_size = mask + 1 ? ALIGN(mask + 1, PAGE_SIZE) >> PAGE_SHIFT : > > + 1UL << (BITS_PER_LONG - PAGE_SHIFT); > > (mask >> PAGE_SHIFT) + 1 ? Should make no difference unless some of the first PAGE_SHIFT bits of mask is 0 (which shouldn't happen). Joerg
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH 16/20] iommu/amd: Optimize map_sg and unmap_sg Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com> - 2016-07-12 13:40 +0200
[PATCH 16/20 v2] iommu/amd: Optimize map_sg and unmap_sg Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org> - 2016-07-12 15:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH 16/20 v2] iommu/amd: Optimize map_sg and unmap_sg Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com> - 2016-07-12 17:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH 16/20 v2] iommu/amd: Optimize map_sg and unmap_sg Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de> - 2016-07-13 12:30 +0200
csiph-web