[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] Re: ATI radeon fails with "iommu=soft swiotlb=force" (seen on RV730/RV740 and RS780/RS800)


  • To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 10:54:41 -0400
  • Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 06:17:06 -0700
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=I5HUbBflXUbl+55NxoP3pRxcklfKmx69d8NI+oD4Sf3oYZHo4RRGX2TcBFg0cJ7oGl zKMt8wPjt7+mT/0kCwLI4PaGLZYNzWLlNe3Xui5k2oH8bKtQJ5iET4c5ehDP5K/TAmGT 0ro6xxHSkJnmYI90VEdrFqZGhzwhao/4rlQxQ=
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>

On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
<konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 10:41:04AM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 10:01 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
>> <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 11:32:31AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >> >>> Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> 02.10.09 20:42 >>>
>> >> >On 10/02/09 10:23, Boris Derzhavets wrote:
>> >> >> Jeremy,
>> >> >> Please,  be aware of bugzilla.xensource.com [1519]  the most recent
>> >> >> entries :-
>> >> >>
>> >> >> http://bugzilla.xensource.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1519
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >Ah, OK.  I pushed a variant of Konrad's patches.  Could you try them out?
>> >>
>> >> Are you really convinced fixing this in DRM is the right thing to do? To
>> >> me, the use of vmalloc_32() in drivers/ieee1394/ seems to make similar
>> >> assumptions (pci_map_sg() not modifying the buffer addresses), and
>> >> who knows where else such assumptions exist. After all, vmalloc_32()
>> >> is *defined* to have the property assumed by both of the users, and
>> >> other than for most kmalloc() cases using GFP_DMA{,32} we're talking
>> >> about double buffering generally large amounts of data here even in
>> >> the cases where the DMA API is being used properly.
>> >
>> > I was chatting with Jeremy about this, and I realized that in some
>> > sense the radeon driver assumes that physical != bus addresses. Which is
>> > OK on x86, but if this card was ever moved to a Sun box it would fail.
>> >
>>
>> FWIW, the radeon drm has been working fine on both sparc and ppc for years.
>
> Thank you for keeping me honest!
>
> I thought that the IOMMU on those boxes would return physical != bus 
> addresses?
> Maybe those days are long gone?
>

Not sure off hand.  I'm not particularly familiar with either arch.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.