[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0C7297FA1D2D244A9C7F6959C0BF1E5201DEA930@azsmsx413.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 09:30:09 -0700
From: "Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To: "Cornelia Huck" <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>
Cc: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "NeilBrown" <neilb@...e.de>,
"Martin Schwidefsky" <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
"linux-s390" <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: 2.6.22-rc1-mm1 - s390 vs. md
> From: Cornelia Huck [mailto:cornelia.huck@...ibm.com]
> Finer granularity is certainly better here, but I'm not quite sure if
> this solves our s390 problem (we don't have dma support). All those
> backends should also have a non-dma version...
In fact that is already there. Here is the form of async_memcpy for
example:
... async_memcpy( ... )
{
struct dma_chan *chan = async_tx_find_channel(depend_tx,
DMA_MEMCPY);
struct dma_device *device = chan ? chan->device : NULL;
int int_en = callback ? 1 : 0;
struct dma_async_tx_descriptor *tx = device ?
device->device_prep_dma_memcpy(chan, len,
int_en) : NULL;
if (tx) { /* run the memcpy asynchronously */
...
} else { /* run the memcpy synchronously */
...
}
}
When CONFIG_DMA_ENGINE=n async_tx_find_channel takes the form:
... async_tx_find_channel( ... )
{
return NULL;
}
So in the S390 case the entire asynchronous path will be compiled away.
--
Dan
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists