Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "kmem_chach".
Did you mean:
kmem_chache
2019 May 16
3
[PATCH 05/10] s390/cio: introduce DMA pools to cio
On Sun, 12 May 2019, Halil Pasic wrote:
> I've also got code that deals with AIRQ_IV_CACHELINE by turning the
> kmem_cache into a dma_pool.
>
> Cornelia, Sebastian which approach do you prefer:
> 1) get rid of cio_dma_pool and AIRQ_IV_CACHELINE, and waste a page per
> vector, or
> 2) go with the approach taken by the patch below?
We only have a couple of users for
2019 May 16
3
[PATCH 05/10] s390/cio: introduce DMA pools to cio
On Sun, 12 May 2019, Halil Pasic wrote:
> I've also got code that deals with AIRQ_IV_CACHELINE by turning the
> kmem_cache into a dma_pool.
>
> Cornelia, Sebastian which approach do you prefer:
> 1) get rid of cio_dma_pool and AIRQ_IV_CACHELINE, and waste a page per
> vector, or
> 2) go with the approach taken by the patch below?
We only have a couple of users for
2019 May 20
0
[PATCH 05/10] s390/cio: introduce DMA pools to cio
...My understanding of these decisions, and especially of the rationale
behind commit 414cbd1e3d14 is limited. Thus if option 3 is the way to
go, and the choices made by 414cbd1e3d14 were sub-optimal, I would feel
much more comfortable if you provided a patch that revises and switches
everything to kmem_chache. I would then just swap kmem_cache out with a
dma_cache and my change would end up a straightforward and relatively
clean one.
So Sebastian, what shall we do?
Regards,
Halil
> Sebastian
>