search for: max_pci_dev

Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "max_pci_dev".

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 22
1
[PATCH 05/10] s390/cio: introduce DMA pools to cio
...PU directed IRQs: 2K (for the per-CPU bit vectors) > > 1..nr_cpu (for the summary bit vector) > > > > I guess this is the same. > > > > > The options are: > > * page allocations for everything > > Worst case we need 20 + #max_pci_dev pages. At the moment we allocate > from ZONE_DMA (!) and waste a lot. > > > * dma_pool for AIRQ_IV_CACHELINE ,gen_pool for others > > I prefer this. Explanation follows. > > > * dma_pool for everything > > > > Less waste by factor factor 16. > > &g...
2019 May 20
0
[PATCH 05/10] s390/cio: introduce DMA pools to cio
...bound on the number of functions? > pci with CPU directed IRQs: 2K (for the per-CPU bit vectors) > 1..nr_cpu (for the summary bit vector) > I guess this is the same. > > The options are: > * page allocations for everything Worst case we need 20 + #max_pci_dev pages. At the moment we allocate from ZONE_DMA (!) and waste a lot. > * dma_pool for AIRQ_IV_CACHELINE ,gen_pool for others I prefer this. Explanation follows. > * dma_pool for everything > Less waste by factor factor 16. > I think we should do option 3 and use a dma_pool with cac...