[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1267131178.23523.1729.camel@pasglop>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 07:52:58 +1100
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Matthew Dharm <mdharm-kernel@...-eyed-alien.net>,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
"Mankad,Maulik Ojas" <x0082077@...com>,
Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...mvista.com>,
Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>,
Sebastian Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Shilimkar,Santosh" <santosh.shilimkar@...com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
Subject: Re: USB mass storage and ARM cache coherency
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 16:50 -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> The main issue here is that the same host controller will use PIO
> sometimes and DMA sometimes, depending on the details of the
> transfer.
> The USB core didn't expect this and consequently we violated the rules
> for DMA mapping. The question is: If the core is fixed so that the
> rules aren't violated, will everything work correctly?
As long as the only issue is that one (ie, doing PIO while dma-map'ed),
then yes, I'd say things should work. If not, then there is -another-
problem to be fixed :-)
Cheers,
Ben.
--
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