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.
>
> T
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.
Segher
On Thu, 1 May 2008 07:04:30 pm Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > Move device_to_mask() to dma-mapping.h because we need to use it from
> > outside dma_64.c in a later patch.
>
> Why does this need to become an inline function?
>
>
> Segher
>
I'm not sure exactly what you mean - it was inline befor
Move device_to_mask() to dma-mapping.h because we need to use it from
outside dma_64.c in a later patch.
Why does this need to become an inline function?
Segher
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinf
Move device_to_mask() to dma-mapping.h because we need to use it from
outside dma_64.c in a later patch.
Signed-off-by: Mark Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/dma_64.c |9 -
include/asm-powerpc/dma-mapping.h |9 +
2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 d
