On Wed, 2011-08-17 at 15:06 +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
[...]
> > > Maybe for the first version a static pool with reasonably small size
> > > (like 128KiB) will be more than enough? This size can be even board
> > > depended or changed with kernel command line for systems that really
> > > need
Hello,
On Wednesday, August 17, 2011 2:29 PM Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 17 August 2011, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> > Do we really need the dynamic pool for the first version? I would like to
> > know how much memory can be allocated in GFP_ATOMIC context. What are the
> > typical sizes of
Hello,
On Wednesday, August 17, 2011 10:01 AM Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 16, 2011 4:26 PM Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Tuesday 16 August 2011, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 03:28:48PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > > Hmm, I don't remember the poi
On Wednesday 17 August 2011, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> Do we really need the dynamic pool for the first version? I would like to
> know how much memory can be allocated in GFP_ATOMIC context. What are the
> typical sizes of such allocations?
I think this highly depends on the board and on the use
Hello,
On Tuesday, August 16, 2011 4:26 PM Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 16 August 2011, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 03:28:48PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > Hmm, I don't remember the point about dynamically sizing the pool for
> > > ARMv6K, but that can wel
On Tuesday 16 August 2011, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 03:28:48PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > Hmm, I don't remember the point about dynamically sizing the pool for
> > ARMv6K, but that can well be an oversight on my part. I do remember the
> > part about taking th
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 03:28:48PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Sunday 14 August 2011, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 02:53:05PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > >
> > > I thought that our discussion ended with the plan to use this only
> > > for ARMv6+ (which has a
On Sunday 14 August 2011, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 02:53:05PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >
> > I thought that our discussion ended with the plan to use this only
> > for ARMv6+ (which has a problem with double mapping) but not on ARMv5
> > and below (which don't
Hello,
On Friday, August 12, 2011 2:53 PM Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday 12 August 2011, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> >
> > From: Russell King
> >
> > Steal memory from the kernel to provide coherent DMA memory to drivers.
> > This avoids the problem with multiple mappings with differing attribut
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 02:53:05PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday 12 August 2011, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> >
> > From: Russell King
> >
> > Steal memory from the kernel to provide coherent DMA memory to drivers.
> > This avoids the problem with multiple mappings with differing attribut
On Friday 12 August 2011, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
>
> From: Russell King
>
> Steal memory from the kernel to provide coherent DMA memory to drivers.
> This avoids the problem with multiple mappings with differing attributes
> on later CPUs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Russell King
> [m.szyprowski: reba
From: Russell King
Steal memory from the kernel to provide coherent DMA memory to drivers.
This avoids the problem with multiple mappings with differing attributes
on later CPUs.
Signed-off-by: Russell King
[m.szyprowski: rebased onto 3.1-rc1]
Signed-off-by: Marek Szyprowski
---
arch/arm/incl
12 matches
Mail list logo
