On Sun, Jun 10, 2007 at 10:01:34PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> Overall, I feel that async_tx is perhaps justifiably receiving the
> silent treatment because offload engines are not a mainstream
> occurrence. Currently only people with an Xscale IOP or a PPC 440spe
> [4] will notice that mainline lacks support for all the features of
> their platform. I see async_tx as a nod to the embedded space where
> offload engines act to make up for the absence of multi-Ghz CPUs with
> streaming SIMD instructions.
>
For what it's worth, I'm planning on tying in the SH DMA stuff to
the dmaengine code, as the async_tx stuff certainly has quite a few bits
of interest. This is probably something I won't get around to for 2.6.23
though, due to time constraints.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
