[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0705231153360.7749@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 11:55:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...dspring.com>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...elEye.com>
cc: Aubrey Li <aubreylee@...il.com>,
Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>,
Bernhard Walle <bwalle@...e.de>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [scsi] Remove __GFP_DMA
On Wed, 23 May 2007, James Bottomley wrote:
> I'll defer to Mark on this one. However, please remember that you
> can't just blindly remove GFP_DMA ... there are some cards which
> require it.
>
> Aacraid is one example ... it has a set of cards that can only DMA
> to 31 bits. For them, the GFP_DMA is necessary: The allocation in
> question is a scatterlist, which must be within the device DMA mask.
a question i asked a while back, and still haven't seen an answer for
-- given this in include/linux/gfp.h:
#define GFP_DMA __GFP_DMA
is there a qualitative difference between these two macros? is there
*supposed* to be? if there isn't, one would think that just one
variation would be sufficient.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
http://fsdev.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
========================================================================
-
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