[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090508083559X.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 08:35:21 +0900
From: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
To: mingo@...e.hu
Cc: yanghy@...fujitsu.com, fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remove DMA_nBIT_MASK macro
On Thu, 7 May 2009 13:18:46 +0200
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>
> * Yang Hongyang <yanghy@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
> > FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> > > We replaced all DMA_nBIT_MASK macros with DMA_BIT_MASK(n) but why do
> > > we still keep DMA_nBIT_MASK macros in include/linux/dma-mapping.h?
> > >
> > > As long as these macros exist, people use them. The current git has
> > > two users and linux-next have other users.
> > >
> > > Is it better to remove DMA_nBIT_MASK macros completely now?
>
> Can you see a way to emit build warnings? If yes then that might be
> a better solution instead of breaking in-the-pipeline code.
Unfortunately, no. Since 2.6.24, include/linux/dma-mapping.h has the
warning:
/*
* NOTE: do not use the below macros in new code and do not add new definitions
* here.
*
* Instead, just open-code DMA_BIT_MASK(n) within your driver
*/
IMO, we give people enough time for migration.
> We missed the upstream window of removing the facilities altogether,
> we could certainly do that in the next merge window though.
Can you apply this patch to the tip? I want to have this patch in
linux-next to let new users of DMA-nBIT_MASK in linux-next know that
they use wrong macros.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists