[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170218130600.GA24938@kroah.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2017 14:06:00 +0100
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Romain Perier <romain.perier@...labora.com>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
Sean Hefty <sean.hefty@...el.com>,
Hal Rosenstock <hal.rosenstock@...il.com>,
jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, stas.yakovlev@...il.com,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Senna Tschudin <peter.senna@...labora.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 00/20] Replace PCI pool by DMA pool API
On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 09:35:36AM +0100, Romain Perier wrote:
> The current PCI pool API are simple macro functions direct expanded to
> the appropriated dma pool functions. The prototypes are almost the same
> and semantically, they are very similar. I propose to use the DMA pool
> API directly and get rid of the old API.
>
> This set of patches, replaces the old API by the dma pool API, adds
> support to warn about this old API in checkpath.pl and remove the
> defines.
Why is this a "RFC" series? Personally, I never apply those as it
implies that the author doesn't think they are ready to be merged :)
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists