On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 10:17 -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 22, 2007 10:04:32 am James Bottomley wrote:
> > The spec isn't ambiguous ... it says if the device and bridge agree on
> > relaxed ordering, then it *may* be observed in the transaction. If
> >
On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 19:03 +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> James Bottomley wrote:
> > I really don't think a work around for a PCI spec violation belongs in
> > the generic DMA code, do you? The correct fix for this should be to set
> > the device hints to strict orderi
On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 09:51 -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 22, 2007 9:44:55 am James Bottomley wrote:
> > > The problem is a DMA write (say to a completion queue) from a device may
> > > imply something about another DMA write from the same device (say the
&
On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 09:03 -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 22, 2007 7:02:38 am James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 09:39 +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> > > James Bottomley wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2007-08-21 at 17:34 -0700, [EMAIL PROTE
On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 09:39 +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-08-21 at 17:34 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> The term "posted DMA" is used to describe this behavior in the Altix
> >> Device Driver Writer's
On Tue, 2007-08-21 at 17:34 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 03:55:29PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote:
>
> > .
> > Almost every platform supports posted DMA ... its a property of most PCI
> > bridge chips.
> >
>
> The term &
On Tue, 2007-08-21 at 13:05 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > diff --git a/Documentation/DMA-API.txt b/Documentation/DMA-API.txt
> > index cc7a8c3..e117b72 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/DMA-API.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/DMA-API.txt
> > @@ -392,6 +392,28 @@ Notes: You must do this:
> >
> > See a
On Tue, 2007-03-06 at 16:06 +0100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> int __must_check pci_create_sysfs_dev_files (struct pci_dev *pdev)
> @@ -644,10 +644,13 @@ int __must_check pci_create_sysfs_dev_fi
> }
> }
> /* add platform-specific attributes */
> - pcibios_add_platform_e
On Tue, 2007-03-06 at 16:06 +0100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> I'm not sure if this is going to fly, weak symbols work on the compilers I'm
> using, but whether they work for all of the affected architectures I can't
> say.
> I've cc'ed as many arch maintainers/lists as I could find.
Well, for your
