From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 9 14:41:57 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE28D106566B for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2010 14:41:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from avg@freebsd.org) Received: from citadel.icyb.net.ua (citadel.icyb.net.ua [212.40.38.140]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FC318FC08 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2010 14:41:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from odyssey.starpoint.kiev.ua (alpha-e.starpoint.kiev.ua [212.40.38.101]) by citadel.icyb.net.ua (8.8.8p3/ICyb-2.3exp) with ESMTP id RAA20921; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 17:41:38 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from avg@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <4BBF3CA1.1040001@freebsd.org> Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 17:41:37 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100319) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Scott Long References: <4BBEE2DD.3090409@freebsd.org> <07A7155D-0836-4D8C-BCF4-70FC16C77B69@samsco.org> <4BBF39C7.4050308@freebsd.org> <682A6F1E-31E3-4920-A66E-452221866945@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <682A6F1E-31E3-4920-A66E-452221866945@samsco.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: arch@freebsd.org, Rick Macklem Subject: Re: (in)appropriate uses for MAXBSIZE X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 14:41:57 -0000 on 09/04/2010 17:35 Scott Long said the following: > On Apr 9, 2010, at 8:29 AM, Andriy Gapon wrote: > >> on 09/04/2010 16:52 Scott Long said the following: >>> Storage drivers are insulated from the details of MAXBSIZE by GEOM honoring >>> the driver's advertised max-i/o-size attribute. What I see when I grep through the >>> sources are mostly uses in busdma attributes, which themselves probably came >>> via cut-n-paste from prior drivers. I can't come up with any explanation for that >>> which makes good design sense, so I'll agree that storage drivers shouldn't >>> reference MAXBSIZE. >> Should DFLTPHYS be used there? >> Or is there a better DMA-specific constant? >> Or, perhaps, each driver should just use its won private constant based on its >> hardware capabilities? > > Each driver should be advertising its own maxio attribute, with the exception > of CAM drivers. Advertising is optional in CAM, and is defaulted to 64k. But > yes, each driver should define and use its own constants here. I actually meant not what drivers advertise but what they use in busdma. Or are those directly related? -- Andriy Gapon