Sorry, you're going to have to explain where this extra branch is, I
don't see it.
> >> If were to try the approach of using pci_{map,sync}_single
> >> always (i.e., just writing the code not to use alloc_consistent),
> >> that would have a performance cost on machines where using
> >> consistent memory for writing small amounts of data is cheaper than
> >> the cost of the cache flushes that would otherwise be required.
> >
> >Well, I'm only talking about the cases where we actually care about
> >reducing the use of consistent memory.
>
> Then you're not fully weighing the benefits of this facility.
> The primary beneficiaries of this facility are device drivers for
> which we'd like to have the performance advantages of consistent
> memory when available (at least on machines that always return
> consistent memory) but which we'd also like to have work as
What performance advantages of consistent memory? Can you name any
non-fully-consistent platform where consistent memory is preferable
when it is not strictly required? For, all the non-consistent
platforms I'm aware of getting consistent memory means disabling the
cache and therefore is to be avoided wherever it can be.
> efficiently as possible on platforms that lack consistent memory or
> have so little that we want the device driver to still work even when
> no consistent memory is available. That includes all PCI devices that
> users of the inconsistent parisc machines want to use.
-- David Gibson | For every complex problem there is a david@gibson.dropbear.id.au | solution which is simple, neat and | wrong. http://www.ozlabs.org/people/dgibson - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/