[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A3FA653.7060008@garzik.org>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 11:42:11 -0400
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
CC: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] parport_pc: set properly the dma_mask for parport_pc
device
Alan Cox wrote:
> From: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
>
> parport_pc_probe_port() creates the own 'parport_pc' device if the
> device argument is NULL. Then parport_pc_probe_port() doesn't
> initialize the dma_mask and coherent_dma_mask of the device and calls
> dma_alloc_coherent with it. dma_alloc_coherent fails because
> dma_alloc_coherent() doesn't accept the uninitialized dma_mask:
>
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/6/16/150
>
> Long ago, X86_32 and X86_64 had the own dma_alloc_coherent
> implementations; X86_32 accepted a device having dma_mask that is not
> initialized however X86_64 didn't. When we merged them, we chose to
> prohibit a device having dma_mask that is not initialized. I think
> that it's good to require drivers to set up dma_mask (and
> coherent_dma_mask) properly if the drivers want DMA.
>
> Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
> Reported-by: Malcom Blaney <malcolm.blaney@...tek.com.au>
> Tested-by: Malcom Blaney <malcolm.blaney@...tek.com.au>
> Cc: stable@...nel.org
> Signed-off-by: Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
>
> drivers/parport/parport_pc.c | 3 +++
> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...hat.com>
--
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