On Mon, 2016-02-01 at 07:39 -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
> >> Could we have an arch_vring_eschew_dma_api(dev) function which the
> >> affected architectures could provide (as a prelude to fixing it so that
> >> the DMA API does the right thing for *itself*)?
> >
> > I'm fine with this.
>
> I m
On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 5:23 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 11:22:03AM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
>> On Thu, 2016-01-28 at 18:31 -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> > This is a kludge, but no one has come up with a a better idea yet.
>> > We'll introduce DMA API support gua
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 11:22:03AM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-01-28 at 18:31 -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > This is a kludge, but no one has come up with a a better idea yet.
> > We'll introduce DMA API support guarded by vring_use_dma_api().
> > Eventually we may be able to re
On Thu, 2016-01-28 at 18:31 -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> This is a kludge, but no one has come up with a a better idea yet.
> We'll introduce DMA API support guarded by vring_use_dma_api().
> Eventually we may be able to return true on more and more systems,
> and hopefully we can get rid of vri
This is a kludge, but no one has come up with a a better idea yet.
We'll introduce DMA API support guarded by vring_use_dma_api().
Eventually we may be able to return true on more and more systems,
and hopefully we can get rid of vring_use_dma_api() entirely some
day.
Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirsk
