linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv4] DMAEngine: Define interleaved transfer request api

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 18 Oct 2011 23:23:03 +0530
From:	Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@...aro.org>
To:	Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk>
Cc:	"Bounine, Alexandre" <Alexandre.Bounine@....com>,
	"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
	Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	DL-SHA-WorkGroupLinux <workgroup.linux@....com>,
	Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4] DMAEngine: Define interleaved transfer request api

On 18 October 2011 23:05, Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> However, Jassi's suggestion that we redefine dma_addr_t to be 64-bit
> for just the DMA engine code is utterly insane and unworkable.  We
> can't have typedefs which change depending on which bits of code are
> being built, potentially changing the layout of structures being passed
> around inside the kernel.
>
I am not sure you understood what I meant.
When I said
     "Perhaps simply change dma_addr_t to u64 in dmaengine.h alone"
I meant
      s/dma_addr_t/u64
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/