[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171003114330.GA24592@lst.de>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2017 13:43:30 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Christophe LEROY <christophe.leroy@....fr>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
Chris Zankel <chris@...kel.net>,
Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mips@...ux-mips.org, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org,
x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>,
Guan Xuetao <gxt@...c.pku.edu.cn>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/11] powerpc: make dma_cache_sync a no-op
On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 01:24:57PM +0200, Christophe LEROY wrote:
>> powerpc does not implement DMA_ATTR_NON_CONSISTENT allocations, so it
>> doesn't make any sense to do any work in dma_cache_sync given that it
>> must be a no-op when dma_alloc_attrs returns coherent memory.
> What about arch/powerpc/mm/dma-noncoherent.c ?
>
> Powerpc 8xx doesn't have coherent memory.
It doesn't implement the DMA_ATTR_NON_CONSISTENT interface either,
so if it really doesn't have a way to provide dma coherent allocation
(although the code in __dma_alloc_coherent suggests it does provide
dma coherent allocations) I have no idea how it could ever have
worked.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists