John David Anglin wrote:
>> James Bottomley wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 17:23 +0100, Roel Kluin wrote:
>>>> duplicate pa11_dma_alloc_consistent; more appropriate appears
>>>> pa11_dma_alloc_noncoherent here.
>>>>
>>>> Not tested, please confirm that this fix is correct
>>> No, it looks completely incorrect to me. What makes you think a pcxl
>>> box has a problem with coherency?
>> Ok, please ignore the patch then. It just appeared suspicious to me
>> that the function did exist, but the names assigned were different.
>
> How about a comment?
Based on James Bottomley's explanation maybe a comment like this?
---
Explain why dma_alloc_noncoherent is only used for boxes PA7200 and below
Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
diff --git a/arch/parisc/kernel/pci-dma.c b/arch/parisc/kernel/pci-dma.c
index 9448d4e..fc3325a 100644
--- a/arch/parisc/kernel/pci-dma.c
+++ b/arch/parisc/kernel/pci-dma.c
@@ -567,6 +567,10 @@ static void *fail_alloc_consistent(struct device *dev,
size_t size,
return NULL;
}
+/*
+ * dma_alloc_noncoherent is a fallback for boxes PA7200 and below which
+ * cannot allocate coherent memory.
+ */
static void *pa11_dma_alloc_noncoherent(struct device *dev, size_t size,
dma_addr_t *dma_handle, gfp_t flag)
{
@@ -586,6 +590,10 @@ static void pa11_dma_free_noncoherent(struct device *dev,
size_t size,
return;
}
+/*
+ * PCXL allocates coherent memory even for dma_alloc_noncoherent() due to the
+ * uncached trick for coherent memory.
+ */
struct hppa_dma_ops pcx_dma_ops = {
.dma_supported = pa11_dma_supported,
.alloc_consistent = fail_alloc_consistent,
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
