From owner-freebsd-arm@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jul 10 14:54:08 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arm@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A02F106566B;
	Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:54:08 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from tinguely@casselton.net)
Received: from casselton.net (casselton.net [63.165.140.2])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 476678FC0C;
	Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:54:08 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from tinguely@casselton.net)
Received: from casselton.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by casselton.net (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6AEs7v6087495;
	Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:54:07 -0500 (CDT)
	(envelope-from tinguely@casselton.net)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=casselton.net;
	s=ccnMail; t=1247237647;
	bh=IKFxBuXtrwC/tmtdThv1T+QAvi2noRt5xGSWIPAiZ44=;
	h=Date:From:Message-Id:To:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To;
	b=lXCRrrubGEtzQWNfBMVOtUh8LkAz2Ro54vNBqggEpGSns9luyQ3RkZ3LmemawKANG
	B6nOAV/CmssxUqRh7Xsqy0/z2ZG0q1Gula7+PXTr2Z2X4dii+EJtJfQPSeqp8dfG5z
	zmWpkdD/eTS1PkpFwWlENZmOMUH3QXcyINqT+mPI=
Received: (from tinguely@localhost)
	by casselton.net (8.14.3/8.14.2/Submit) id n6AEs7nJ087492;
	Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:54:07 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from tinguely)
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:54:07 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@casselton.net>
Message-Id: <200907101454.n6AEs7nJ087492@casselton.net>
To: mih@semihalf.com, tinguely@casselton.net
In-Reply-To: <200907101307.n6AD7lZT081110@casselton.net>
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.3.2
	(casselton.net [127.0.0.1]); Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:54:07 -0500 (CDT)
Cc: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: pmap problem in FreeBSD current - PS
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the StrongARM Processor <freebsd-arm.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arm-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arm>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arm@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arm-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arm-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:54:08 -0000


PS. sorry to even question your cpu_(l2)idcache_wbinv_range() implemetation.
    the cpu_idcache_wbinv_range() in bus_dmamem_alloc() is wrong.
    arm_remap_nocache() should wb/inv the entire page especially if the
    buffer that uses the page is less than a page size or non-page aligned. 
    The cache lines NOT in the buffer is the data that can be lost if
    used while the nocache shadow mapping is in effect.

   As an open question to the group: should we add an explict page
   cpu_(l2)idcache_wbinv_range() in the arm_remap_nocache() routine,
   so we know that it happens rather than a side effect of the new
   managing of kernel pages?

   For freebsd-9, I will rewrite arm_remap_nocache() to get rid of the
   shadow map.

Did your lock problems go away?

Good work.

--Mark Tinguely