On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 09:38:32 -0500
James Bottomley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 23:34 +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> > Yeah, I thought about it and it's possible (but not so easy). parisc
> > has IOMMU merging helper code and two parisc IOMMUs use it. ia64
> > sba_iommu is a
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 12:02:21 +0200
Muli Ben-Yehuda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2007 at 05:57:57PM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
>
> > iommu code merges sg lists without considering lld's restrictions so
> > some llds need a workaround to split sg lists again. This patchset
> > fi
On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 23:34 +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> Yeah, I thought about it and it's possible (but not so easy). parisc
> has IOMMU merging helper code and two parisc IOMMUs use it. ia64
> sba_iommu is almost identical to parisc code. x86_64 gart, power, and
> alpha do in their own way. Bu
On Wed, Sep 26, 2007 at 05:57:57PM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> iommu code merges sg lists without considering lld's restrictions so
> some llds need a workaround to split sg lists again. This patchset
> fixes iommu to handle lld's max segment size limit properly.
The patches look reasonable t
iommu code merges sg lists without considering lld's restrictions so
some llds need a workaround to split sg lists again. This patchset
fixes iommu to handle lld's max segment size limit properly.
The problem is that iommu code can't access to the restrictions
because they are in request_queue. io
5 matches
Mail list logo
