On Wednesday 16 May 2007, David Brownell wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 May 2007, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > Hi everybody,
> >
> > following the discussion about the split bulk transfers, Alan Stern and
> > David Brownell told me I shouldn't use usb_buffer_alloc as a generic
> > purpose URB buffer allocated. However, Documentation/usb/dma.txt
> > contradicts this. Should the documentation be fixed, or can/should
> > usb_buffer_alloc be used to allocate URB buffers ?
>
> I think the doc should be fixed ... avoid using it as a general purpose
> allocator.  We've learned better since that doc was first written.  :)
>
> It *can* be used to allocate buffers, in cases where the DMA map/unmap
> overhead of the more typical usage would excessive.  So it's not going
> to vanish.

As I explained in my answer to Alan's mail, I think a general purpose 
allocator will be needed if we implement scatter-gather support for EHCI 
controllers (provided I'm not mistaken and that the hardware actually 
supports it). Even without scatter-gather, a general purpose allocator could 
allocate virtual memory instead of physically contiguous pages for PIO USB 
host controllers.

Could we change usb_buffer_alloc and turn it into a general purpose 
allocator ? A flag could be used to DMA-map the buffer when needed.

Laurent Pinchart

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel

Reply via email to