Re: [PATCH 02/10] swiotlb: Make 'setup_io_tlb_npages' accept new'swiotlb=' syntax.

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk]

On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 03:53:20PM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 11:26:58 -0500
> Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > The old syntax for 'swiotlb' is still in effect, and we extend it
> > now to include the overflow buffer size. The syntax is now:
> > 
> > swiotlb=[force,][nslabs=<pages>,][overflow=<size>] or more
> > commonly know as:
> > 
> > swiotlb=[force]
> > swiotlb=[nslabs=<pages>]
> > swiotlb=[overflow=<size>]
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/x86/x86_64/boot-options.txt |    6 ++++-
> >  lib/swiotlb.c                             |   36 +++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> >  2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> 'overflow' is a workaround for broken drivers (that ignores DMA
> mapping errors). We have fixed such drivers and other hardware IOMMU
> implementations don't have such workaround. So please don't extend
> it. We should remove it instead.

Will do. Do you remember which drivers (or e-mail threads) exhibited this
behavior so that I can do a regression test to make absolutely certain
that removing the overflow functionality won't blow something up?

--
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/