Re: [LKML] Re: [PATCH v3] ad7877: keep dma rx buffers in seperatecache lines

From: FUJITA Tomonori
Date: Thu May 20 2010 - 00:48:59 EST

On Wed, 19 May 2010 15:58:37 +0100
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Wed, 2010-05-19 at 23:38 +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> >
> > > I don't think we need to hide the fact that some platforms have
> > > specific alignment restrictions for DMA. So if any drivers make use
> > > of the alignment, I see no problem with __dma_aligned.
> >
> > IIRC, such was proposed several times:
> >
> >
> >
> > I guess that we agreed that it's better to tell driver writers to just
> > use kmalloc.
> Perhaps -- but only a few days ago in this thread, they were being
> advised to use ____cacheline_aligned instead!

Hmm, driver writers should read DMA-API and DMA-API-HOWTO docs.

> And for this case it really does seem to make sense to keep the buffer
> in the parent structure rather than allocating it separately. The DMA
> buffers are tiny and on cache-coherent architectures it's _much_ more
> efficient just to have them in the original structure and use
> __dma_aligned.

Yeah, I think that that's a valid point (which was also discussed in
the past). However, I tend to agree on:

I think that forcing kmalloc is not that bad. Surely more code, but
the performance is not notable in most cases. IMHO, exporting cache
line thing everywhere is worse than it.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at