Sorry for the late reply, On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 15:35:11 +1000 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <b...@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-06-29 at 17:19 +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > > On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 12:05:23 -0700 > > Nishanth Aravamudan <n...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > From: Milton Miller <milt...@bga.com> > > > > > > If an architecture sets ARCH_HAS_DMA_GET_REQUIRED_MASK and has settable > > > dma_map_ops, the required mask may change by the ops implementation. > > > For example, a system that always has an mmu inline may only require 32 > > > bits while a swiotlb would desire bits to cover all of memory. > > > > > > Therefore add the field if the architecture does not use the generic > > > definition of dma_get_required_mask. The first use will by by powerpc. > > > Note that this does add some dependency on the order in which files are > > > visible here. > > .../... > > > If you add get_required_mask to dma_map_ops, we should clean up ia64 > > too and implement the generic proper version in > > dma-mapping-common.h. Then we kill ARCH_HAS_DMA_GET_REQUIRED_MASK > > ifdef hack. Otherwise, I don't think it makes sense to add this to > > dma_map_ops. > > In the meantime, can I have an ack so I can include this along with the > rest of Milton's patches ? It's been around for a while now :-) Sure, we can clean up this later. Thanks, _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
