[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v1 06/47] mtrr: add __arch_phys_wc_add()
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 04:48:46PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez >> <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@xxxxxxxx> >> > >> > Ideally on systems using PAT we can expect a swift >> > transition away from MTRR. There can be a few exceptions >> > to this, one is where device drivers are known to exist >> > on PATs with errata, another situation is observed on >> > old device drivers where devices had combined MMIO >> > register access with whatever area they typically >> > later wanted to end up using MTRR for on the same >> > PCI BAR. This situation can still be addressed by >> > splitting up ioremap'd PCI BAR into two ioremap'd >> > calls, one for MMIO registers, and another for whatever >> > is desirable for write-combining -- in order to >> > accomplish this though quite a bit of driver >> > restructuring is required. >> > >> > Device drivers which are known to require large >> > amount of re-work in order to split ioremap'd areas >> > can use __arch_phys_wc_add() to avoid regressions >> > when PAT is enabled. >> > >> > For a good example driver where things are neatly >> > split up on a PCI BAR refer the infiniband qib >> > driver. For a good example of a driver where good >> > amount of work is required refer to the infiniband >> > ipath driver. >> > >> > This is *only* a transitive API -- and as such no new >> > drivers are ever expected to use this. >> >> What's the exact layout that this helps? I'm sceptical that this can >> ever be correct. >> >> Is there some awful driver that has a large ioremap that's supposed to >> contain multiple different memtypes? > > Yes, I cc'd you just now on one where I made changes on a driver which uses > one > PCI with mixed memtypes and uses MTRR to hole in WC. A transition to > arch_phys_wc_add() is therefore not possible if PAT is enabled as it would > regress those drivers by making the MTRR WC hole trick non functional. > The changes are non trivial and so in this series I supplied changes on > one driver only to show the effort required. The other drivers which > required this were: > > Driver File > ------------------------------------------------------------ > fusion drivers/message/fusion/mptbase.c > ivtv drivers/media/pci/ivtv/ivtvfb.c > ipath drivers/infiniband/hw/ipath/ipath_driver.c > > This series makes those drivers use __arch_phys_wc_add() more as a > transitory phase in hopes we can address the proper split as with the > atyfb illustrates. For ipath the changes required have a nice template > with the qib driver as they share very similar driver structure, the > qib driver *did* do the nice split. > >> If so, can we ioremap + set_page_xyz instead? > > I'm not sure I see which call we'd use. Care to provide an example patch > alternative for the atyfb as a case in point alternative to the work required > to do the split? > I'm still confused. Would it be insufficient to ioremap_nocache the whole thing and then call set_memory_wc on parts of it? (Sorry, set_page_xyz was a typo.) --Andy -- Andy Lutomirski AMA Capital Management, LLC _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |