From: Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The ARM dma_supported() is rather basic, and I don't think it takes into
account everything that it should do (eg, whether the mask agrees with what
we'd return for GFP_DMA allocations). Note this.
Signed-off-by: Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
25-akpm/include/asm-arm/dma-mapping.h | 3 +++
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff -puN include/asm-arm/dma-mapping.h~arm-add-comment-about-dma_supported
include/asm-arm/dma-mapping.h
--- 25/include/asm-arm/dma-mapping.h~arm-add-comment-about-dma_supported
2005-04-12 03:21:04.755413968 -0700
+++ 25-akpm/include/asm-arm/dma-mapping.h 2005-04-12 03:21:04.758413512
-0700
@@ -21,6 +21,9 @@ extern void consistent_sync(void *kaddr,
* properly. For example, if your device can only drive the low 24-bits
* during bus mastering, then you would pass 0x00ffffff as the mask
* to this function.
+ *
+ * FIXME: This should really be a platform specific issue - we should
+ * return false if GFP_DMA allocations may not satisfy the supplied 'mask'.
*/
static inline int dma_supported(struct device *dev, u64 mask)
{
_
-
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/
