On Fri, 2 May 2008 10:32:35 am Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > I'm not sure exactly what you mean - it was inline before the move.
>
> Heh, I missed that.
>
> > But if everybody thinks it would be better to leave it in dma_64.c and
> > just
> > expose it for use outside, I'm fine with that.
>
> That's what I meant, yes.
Thought so. How's this:
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/dma_64.c | 2 +-
include/asm-powerpc/dma-mapping.h | 3 +++
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Index: upstream/arch/powerpc/kernel/dma_64.c
===================================================================
--- upstream.orig/arch/powerpc/kernel/dma_64.c
+++ upstream/arch/powerpc/kernel/dma_64.c
@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
* Generic iommu implementation
*/
-static inline unsigned long device_to_mask(struct device *dev)
+unsigned long device_to_mask(struct device *dev)
{
if (dev->dma_mask && *dev->dma_mask)
return *dev->dma_mask;
Index: upstream/include/asm-powerpc/dma-mapping.h
===================================================================
--- upstream.orig/include/asm-powerpc/dma-mapping.h
+++ upstream/include/asm-powerpc/dma-mapping.h
@@ -45,6 +45,9 @@ extern void __dma_sync_page(struct page
#endif /* ! CONFIG_NOT_COHERENT_CACHE */
#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
+
+extern unsigned long device_to_mask(struct device *dev);
+
/*
* DMA operations are abstracted for G5 vs. i/pSeries, PCI vs. VIO
*/
Thanks!
Mark.
>
>
> Segher
>
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
