Re: swiotlb buffer is full with 3.13-rc1+ but not 3.4.

2013-12-03 Thread Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 03:48:44PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote: On Sat, 2013-11-30 at 13:56 -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: My theory is that the SWIOTLB is not full - it is just that the request is for a compound page that is more than 512kB. Please note that SWIOTLB highest chunk of

Re: swiotlb buffer is full with 3.13-rc1+ but not 3.4.

2013-12-03 Thread James Bottomley
On Tue, 2013-12-03 at 12:33 -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 03:48:44PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote: On Sat, 2013-11-30 at 13:56 -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: My theory is that the SWIOTLB is not full - it is just that the request is for a compound page

Re: swiotlb buffer is full with 3.13-rc1+ but not 3.4.

2013-12-01 Thread Stefano Stabellini
On Sat, 30 Nov 2013, James Bottomley wrote: On Sat, 2013-11-30 at 13:56 -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: My theory is that the SWIOTLB is not full - it is just that the request is for a compound page that is more than 512kB. Please note that SWIOTLB highest chunk of buffer it can deal

Re: swiotlb buffer is full with 3.13-rc1+ but not 3.4.

2013-11-30 Thread James Bottomley
On Sat, 2013-11-30 at 13:56 -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: My theory is that the SWIOTLB is not full - it is just that the request is for a compound page that is more than 512kB. Please note that SWIOTLB highest chunk of buffer it can deal with is 512kb. And that is of course the