[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTinZe1N2NFOzU32PL2AIZi9TovHj5pQ2Y65eOc1T@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 16:43:25 -0400
From: Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@...il.com>
To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oskar Schirmer <os@...ix.com>,
Michael Hennerich <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>,
linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Daniel Glöckner <dg@...ix.com>,
Oliver Schneidewind <osw@...ix.com>,
Johannes Weiner <jw@...ix.com>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
David Brownell <dbrownell@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] ad7877: keep dma rx buffers in seperate cache lines
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 16:38, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> that is a question for David/Grant. i'm not the SPI core maintainer,
>> i'm merely watching over some SPI drivers. however, this answer also
>> doesnt sound like it's thinking big enough because what you're
>> proposing isnt specific to the SPI bus -- any time a DMA safe buffer
>> is needed dynamically, this function could be used.
>
> Well, we have dma_alloc_coherent(), shouldn't you be using that instead?
my understanding is that dma_alloc_coherent() gives you a buffer that
is always coherent. the SPI layers take care of flushing and such on
the fly which means allocating coherent memory is overkill and bad for
performance.
-mike
--
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