[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTik94Go7W4AMquncm-novWkHtLOBRn7BfpepoEZz@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 20:28:21 +0100
From: Linus Walleij <linus.ml.walleij@...il.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc: Per Forlin <per.forlin@...ricsson.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Per Forlin <per.forlin@...aro.org>,
Rabin VINCENT <rabin.vincent@...ricsson.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dmaengine: dma40: Add support to split up large elements
2010/12/21 Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>:
> If that is the case then the temporary fix for 2.6.37 is along the
> lines of fixing up the clients to not submit such large requests.
They don't, currently. We actually had some debate about this
internally, because the only driver submitting something >64K-1
was the MMCI driver (which is yet not in mainline) and yes, indeed
the suggested solution was to amend the MMCI driver
for the time being.
I insisted on doing this fix anyway because I was under the
impression that memcpy() is supposed to handle *any* size of
request, is this the intention?
Since its semantics are not documented as far as I can see I
was maybe misguided in assuming that any size of buffer should
be possible to pass in... :-(
> You
> mention the "memcpy api contract" can this be triggered outside of
> dmatest?
Nope. That and out-of-tree MMCI.
So for the next merge window it is, if the patch is semantically
correct.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
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