Hi Robin,
On 13 January 2015 at 16:49, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 2015-01-09 17:56, Robin Murphy wrote:
>>
>> Many DMA controllers and other devices set max_segment_size to
>> indicate their scatter-gather capability, but have no interest in
>> segment_boundary_mask. However, the exi
Hello,
On 2015-01-09 17:56, Robin Murphy wrote:
Many DMA controllers and other devices set max_segment_size to
indicate their scatter-gather capability, but have no interest in
segment_boundary_mask. However, the existence of a dma_parms structure
precludes the use of any default value, leaving
On 09/01/15 19:45, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Friday 09 January 2015 16:56:03 Robin Murphy wrote:
This one's a bit tricky to find a home for - I think technically it's
probably an IOMMU patch, but then the long-underlying problem doesn't
seem to have blown up anything until arm64, and my motivatio
On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 07:45:49PM +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday 09 January 2015 16:56:03 Robin Murphy wrote:
> >
> > This one's a bit tricky to find a home for - I think technically it's
> > probably an IOMMU patch, but then the long-underlying problem doesn't
> > seem to have blown up
On Friday 09 January 2015 16:56:03 Robin Murphy wrote:
>
> This one's a bit tricky to find a home for - I think technically it's
> probably an IOMMU patch, but then the long-underlying problem doesn't
> seem to have blown up anything until arm64, and my motivation is to
> make bits of Juno work,
Many DMA controllers and other devices set max_segment_size to
indicate their scatter-gather capability, but have no interest in
segment_boundary_mask. However, the existence of a dma_parms structure
precludes the use of any default value, leaving them as zeros (assuming
a properly kzalloc'ed struc
