On 02/03/16 09:44, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > Hi, > >> I think the "dma_enabled" property is not exposed to the user. > > It is: "-global fw_cfg.dma_enabled=off" works (as in: doesn't throw an > error). Has no effect through as it gets overridden later on. > >> The default value of "dma_enabled" in both fw_cfg_io_properties and >> fw_cfg_mem_properties is irrelevant; the actual property value is always >> overwritten in fw_cfg_init_io_dma() and fw_cfg_init_mem_wide(), which >> all of the init paths go through. > > And IMHO we should not do that, so setting the property actually has an > effect.
Fair point. >> I agree that DMA capability should be filtered with machine type. >> However, that distinction should not be made using the current >> "dma_enabled" properties (i.e., of "fw_cfg_io_properties" and >> "fw_cfg_mem_properties". Instead, it should be made in the >> board-specific callers of fw_cfg_init_(io_dma|mem_wide). > > Why? That's how "has_reserved_memory" works as well, for example. But, if the property is made work, I guess PC_COMPAT_2_4 can be used too. (Or should it be HW_COMPAT_2_4?) Is that your point? Thanks Laszlo
