Re: [PATCH] ata-sff: always map page before data transfer

2017-05-04 Thread Tycho Andersen
On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 02:51:34AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > And we should be fine. Great, I just sent a v2. Thanks! Tycho

Re: [PATCH] ata-sff: always map page before data transfer

2017-05-04 Thread Tycho Andersen
On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 02:51:34AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > And we should be fine. Great, I just sent a v2. Thanks! Tycho

Re: [PATCH] ata-sff: always map page before data transfer

2017-05-04 Thread Christoph Hellwig
> I don't understand all the factors at play here, so thoughts are definitely > welcome. I don't fully understand the old code either. One thing that is weird is the "use a bounce buffer comment" which doesn't make any sense. The other is the local_irq_save, which isn't really needed for

Re: [PATCH] ata-sff: always map page before data transfer

2017-05-04 Thread Christoph Hellwig
> I don't understand all the factors at play here, so thoughts are definitely > welcome. I don't fully understand the old code either. One thing that is weird is the "use a bounce buffer comment" which doesn't make any sense. The other is the local_irq_save, which isn't really needed for

[PATCH] ata-sff: always map page before data transfer

2017-05-02 Thread Tycho Andersen
The XPFO [1] patchset may unmap pages from physmap if they happened to be destined for userspace. If such a page is unmapped, it needs to be remapped. Rather than test if a page is in the highmem/xpfo unmapped state, Christoph suggested [2] that we simply always map the page. Suggested-by:

[PATCH] ata-sff: always map page before data transfer

2017-05-02 Thread Tycho Andersen
The XPFO [1] patchset may unmap pages from physmap if they happened to be destined for userspace. If such a page is unmapped, it needs to be remapped. Rather than test if a page is in the highmem/xpfo unmapped state, Christoph suggested [2] that we simply always map the page. Suggested-by: