* Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

quoted text
> On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 12:43:47 +0100 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > * Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, 9 Jan 2009 17:19:17 +0100 Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@amd.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > +struct hash_bucket {
> > > > +	struct list_head list;
> > > > +	spinlock_t lock;
> > > > +} ____cacheline_aligned;
> > > 
> > > __cacheline_aligned_in_smp.
> > > 
> > > This all looks like an exotically large amount of code for a debug 
> > > thingy?
> > 
> > this code checks the DMA usage of ~1 million lines of kernel code - 
> > all the DMA using drivers. I think Joerg's feature is hugely relevant 
> > as DMA scribbles are one of the hardest to debug kernel bugs: they can 
> > end up in permanent data corruption or other hard to find bugs. In 
> > fact i think his patchset is rather simple and even having 10 times as 
> > much debug code would pay for its existence in the long run.
> 
> Have we previously found bugs by other means which this facility would 
> have detected?  I don't recall any...

this facility found a handful of real bugs already - Joerg, do you have 
more specifics about that?

Also, such a facility would be useful during driver development, when such 
bugs occur en masse. Faster driver development under Linux is certainly 
desirable.

This facility basically adds a sandbox to all DMA ops and tracks the 
lifetime and validity of DMA operations. Given how ugly DMA bugs can be in 
practice and how hard to debug they are, i see this as good step forward.

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html