[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091026201917.GE24682@elte.hu>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:19:17 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com>
Cc: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>, tglx@...utronix.de,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org, hpa@...or.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: adjust GFP mask handling for coherent allocations
* Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com> wrote:
> >>> Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> 26.10.09 16:22 >>>
> >* Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com> wrote:
> >> And any attempt to eliminate the conditional another way would just
> >> introduce a very similar conditional elsewhere; with this having a
> >> single user (and foreseeably not ever a second one) I would think this
> >> would just make the code less readable.
> >
> >There's 3 other current uses of DMA_BIT_MASK(24) in arch/x86 - couldnt
> >those use ISA_DMA_BIT_MASK too?
>
> Oh, so you didn't mean me to eliminate the conditional in pci-dma.c,
> but just to replace the DMA_BIT_MASK(24) here an elsewhere. Sure, I'm
> fine with adding this to the patch.
Well, can ISA_BIT_MASK fall back to DMA_BIT_MASK(32) on !CONFIG_ISA? If
we have ISA support disabled we might as well pretend the whole world is
PCI, right?
That way we'd get rid of that #ifdef in the .c code too.
Ingo
--
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