On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 08:58:44PM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 07:42:13PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > The ioremap() hidden behind the io_mapping_map_wc() convenience helper > > can be used for remapping multiple pages. Extend the helper so that > > future callers can use it for larger ranges. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> > > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com> > > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vet...@intel.com> > > Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nik...@linux.intel.com> > > Cc: David Airlie <airl...@linux.ie> > > Cc: Yishai Hadas <yish...@mellanox.com> > > Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.willi...@intel.com> > > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> > > Cc: "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <pet...@infradead.org> > > Cc: David Hildenbrand <d...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > Cc: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcg...@kernel.org> > > Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > > Cc: dri-de...@lists.freedesktop.org > > Cc: net...@vger.kernel.org > > Cc: linux-r...@vger.kernel.org > > Cc: linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org > > We have 2 callers today, in the future, can you envision > this API getting more options? If so, in order to avoid the > pain of collateral evolutions I can suggest a descriptor > being passed with the required settings / options. This lets > you evolve the API without needing to go in and modify > old users. If you choose not to that's fine too, just > figured I'd chime in with that as I've seen the pain > with other APIs, and I'm putting an end to the needless > set of collateral evolutions this way.
Do you have a good example in mind? I've one more patch to try and take advantage of the io-mapping (that may or not be such a good idea in practice) but I may as well see if I can make io_mapping more useful when I do. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
