[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201004082324.31481.oliver@neukum.org>
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 23:24:31 +0200
From: Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: Daniel Mack <daniel@...aq.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Pedro Ribeiro <pedrib@...il.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: USB transfer_buffer allocations on 64bit systems
Am Donnerstag, 8. April 2010 18:59:38 schrieb Alan Stern:
> On Thu, 8 Apr 2010, Oliver Neukum wrote:
>
> > Am Mittwoch, 7. April 2010 17:46:17 schrieb Alan Stern:
> > > Or alternatively, instead of allocating regular memory the routine
> > > could simply fail. Then the caller would be responsible for checking
> > > and using regular memory instead of dma-consistent memory. Of course,
> > > that would put an even larger burden on the caller than just forcing it
> > > to keep track of what flag to use.
> >
> > Then it would be sensible to pass it a filled URB, modify it or return
> > an error code.
>
> That would work, but it doesn't match the way existing drivers use the
> interface. For example, the audio driver allocates a 16-byte coherent
> buffer and then uses four bytes from it for each of four different
> URBs.
That will not work with any fallback that does not yield a coherent buffer.
Regards
Oliver
--
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