[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1201713958.3292.27.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:25:58 -0600
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To: akepner@....com
Cc: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Grant Grundler <grundler@...isc-linux.org>,
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
Jes Sorensen <jes@....com>,
Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Muli Ben-Yehuda <muli@...ibm.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] dma/ia64: update ia64 machvecs
In general, the patches look reasonable to me. Just an observation:
On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 21:52 -0800, akepner@....com wrote:
> diff --git a/include/linux/dma-attrs.h b/include/linux/dma-attrs.h
> index e69de29..31af292 100644
> --- a/include/linux/dma-attrs.h
> +++ b/include/linux/dma-attrs.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
> +#ifndef _DMA_ATTR_H
> +#define _DMA_ATTR_H
> +#ifdef ARCH_USES_DMA_ATTRS
> +
> +enum dma_attr {
> + DMA_ATTR_BARRIER,
> + DMA_ATTR_FOO,
> + DMA_ATTR_GOO,
> + DMA_ATTR_MAX,
> +};
> +
The attribute names (DMA_ATTR_...) are going to have to live somewhere
outside of the #ifdef ARCH_USES_DMA_ATTRS otherwise we'll get compile
failures of drivers using attributes on architectures that don't support
them.
Secondly, DMA_ATTR_BARRIER doesn't quite sound right. What you're
actually doing is trying to prescribe strict ordering, so shouldn't this
be something like DMA_ATTR_STRICT_ORDERING (and perhaps with a
corresponding DMA_ATTR_RELAXED_ORDERING for the PCIe case). also,
strike the DMA_ATTR_FOO and DMA_ATTR_GOO since they have no plausible
meaning.
James
--
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