James Bottomley wrote: > On Thu, 2003-05-15 at 17:14, Colin Ngam wrote: > > Right now, on our platform, the Upper 32 Bits of this address is always 0s > > and the Lower 32 Bits has the IOMMU mapped DMA address. When this > > address is given to the card, SAC is generated because the Upper 32 Bits > > are 0s - if the whole 64bits are given to the card. > > > > Now, for PCI-X devices, we need to generate an IOMMU mapped DMA > > address that has the Upper 32 bits non 0s. When the driver gives this > > address to the card, it will generate a DAC for the DMA. > > > > >From what I understand from the pci_alloc_consistant() interface, we cannot > > return a "dma_addr_t" that has the Upper 32bits NON 0s. Is that TRUE? If > > it is, our platform cannot deal with this restriction .. therefore we are > > requesting > > for this extension. > > OK, now you've confused me. I thought you were saying that your PCI > hardware generates two type of addresses: one for DAC that *doesn't* go > through the IOMMU and one for SAC that does? Yes, you are correct .. we have the capability to generate a SAC or DAC address in PCI Mode only. > > > In which case, SAC should be able to go through the IOMMU to reach > anwhere in memory, and thus pci_alloc_consistent should work for you > now. > > Or are you saying it's more efficient to go via the DAC non-iommu cycle > and you'd like to do that preferentially if you could (which is a > feature request, not a hard requirement)? However, in PCI-X mode, we do not have the capability to generate SAC addresses. And yes, you are also correct that it is very much efficient on our architecture to generate DAC for all(PCI/PCI-X) So, it is a hard requirement to have DAC for PCI-X devices and not PCI devices. Hope that is clear .. Thanks. colin > > > JamesReceived on Thu May 15 16:02:24 2003
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:14 EST