On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:23:33PM +0100, Roel Kluin wrote:
>
How about just doing something like this:
diff --git a/arch/parisc/kernel/pci-dma.c b/arch/parisc/kernel/pci-dma.c
index 9448d4e..63f9b7f 100644
--- a/arch/parisc/kernel/pci-dma.c
+++ b/arch/parisc/kernel/pci-dma.c
@@ -409,7 +409,7 @@
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
On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 09:42 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:23:33PM +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
>
> I don't
Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:23:33PM +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
>
> I don't think it is. The memories are fading, so
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
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:23:33PM +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
I don't think it is. The memories are fading, so I don't recall why it
is we do
duplicate pa11_dma_alloc_consistent; more appropriate appears
pa11_dma_alloc_noncoherent here.
Not tested, please confirm that this fix is correct
---
fix noncoherent allocation
Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
diff --git a/arch/parisc/kernel/pci-dma.c
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
On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 09:42 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:23:33PM +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
I don't think it
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
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:23:33PM +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
I don't think it is. The memories are fading, so I don't recall why it
is we do it
duplicate pa11_dma_alloc_consistent; more appropriate appears
pa11_dma_alloc_noncoherent here.
Not tested, please confirm that this fix is correct
---
fix noncoherent allocation
Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
diff --git a/arch/parisc/kernel/pci-dma.c
Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:23:33PM +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
I don't think it is. The memories are fading, so I don't
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:23:33PM +0100, Roel Kluin wrote:
How about just doing something like this:
diff --git a/arch/parisc/kernel/pci-dma.c b/arch/parisc/kernel/pci-dma.c
index 9448d4e..63f9b7f 100644
--- a/arch/parisc/kernel/pci-dma.c
+++ b/arch/parisc/kernel/pci-dma.c
@@ -409,7 +409,7 @@
14 matches
Mail list logo
