On Wednesday 02 July 2008 18:56:18 Larry Finger wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > The patch titled
> > drivers/net/wireless/b43legacy/dma.c: remove the switch in
> > b43legacy_dma_init()
> > has been added to the -mm tree. Its filename is
> >
> > drivers-net-wireless-b43legacy-dmac-remove-the-switch-in-b43legacy_dma_init.patch
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > Subject: drivers/net/wireless/b43legacy/dma.c: remove the switch in
> > b43legacy_dma_init()
> > From: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > The gcc 3.4 fork used to compile the MN10300 port emits unwanted
> > __ucmpdi2() calls for this switch on a 64bit value.
> >
> > Fix it by transforming the switch to equivalent "if ... else if ..."
> > statements.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: David Howells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: Stefano Brivio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: John W. Linville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: Michael Buesch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: Larry Finger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > ---
> >
> > drivers/net/wireless/b43legacy/dma.c | 16 ++++++----------
> > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff -puN
> > drivers/net/wireless/b43legacy/dma.c~drivers-net-wireless-b43legacy-dmac-remove-the-switch-in-b43legacy_dma_init
> > drivers/net/wireless/b43legacy/dma.c
> > ---
> > a/drivers/net/wireless/b43legacy/dma.c~drivers-net-wireless-b43legacy-dmac-remove-the-switch-in-b43legacy_dma_init
> > +++ a/drivers/net/wireless/b43legacy/dma.c
> > @@ -1027,19 +1027,15 @@ int b43legacy_dma_init(struct b43legacy_
> > enum b43legacy_dmatype type;
> >
> > dmamask = supported_dma_mask(dev);
> > - switch (dmamask) {
> > - default:
> > - B43legacy_WARN_ON(1);
> > - case DMA_30BIT_MASK:
> > +
> > + if (dmamask == DMA_30BIT_MASK)
> > type = B43legacy_DMA_30BIT;
> > - break;
> > - case DMA_32BIT_MASK:
> > + else if (dmamask == DMA_32BIT_MASK)
> > type = B43legacy_DMA_32BIT;
> > - break;
> > - case DMA_64BIT_MASK:
> > + else if (dmamask == DMA_64BIT_MASK)
> > type = B43legacy_DMA_64BIT;
> > - break;
> > - }
> > + else
> > + B43legacy_WARN_ON(1);
> >
> > err = ssb_dma_set_mask(dev->dev, dmamask);
> > if (err) {
> > _
>
> Andrew,
>
> When I received your E-mail, I wondered why there was not a similar
> "fix" for b43. It was then I discovered how much b43 and b43legacy had
> diverged while I wasn't looking. I have no objections to your patch;
> however, I wonder if it might be better to fix b43legacy in the same
> way that b43 was changed. I have prepared and tested such a fix (shown
> below). The only problem with this is that the patch is much more
> intrusive than Adrian's and there may be a problem getting it into
> 2.6.26 before it is released, but then I do not think that you intend to
> send the -mm patch to 2.6.26.
>
> What do you think is the best route to go?
I think it hardly matters, as there are no 64bit legacy devices.
So you don't need that probing loop.
--
Greetings Michael.
_______________________________________________
Bcm43xx-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/bcm43xx-dev
