On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 18:15 -0500, Timur Tabi wrote: > Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > Sure, that's the right way to go, I meant bits of pieces of the > > infrastructure in between. Why diverge from other archs gratuituously > > here ? > > Ok, I'm confused. Are you suggesting that drivers do this: > > u64 fsl_dma_dmamask = DMA_BIT_MASK(36); > dev->dma_mask = &fsl_dma_dmamask; > v = dma_alloc_coherent(dev, ..., GFP_DMA32); > > That is, set the DMA mask *and* set GFP_DMA32? That seems redundant.
No, but dma_alloc_coherent would under the hood. > I don't understand why a driver would set GFP_DMA32 if it has already set > the mask. The layers in between, not the well behaved drivers. Again, we have ZONE_DMA32 specifically for the purpose, why use something else ? In any case, make the whole thing at the very least a config option, I don't want sane HW to have to deal with split zones. Cheers, Ben. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
