On Tue, 14 Aug 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > I am not sure what you mean by that. Ia64 ZONE_DMA == x86_84 ZONE_DMA32?
>
> Hmm, when I wrote GFP_DMA32 it was a #define GFP_DMA32 GFP_DMA
> on ia64 so that drivers not need to ifdef. Someone nasty
> seems to have removed that too. I guess it would be best
> to readd.
What would be the point?
> But then it wouldn't make sense to have GFP_DMA on ia64 and GFP_DMA32
> on x86. Since driver writers are more likely to test on x86
> I would recommend ia64 having compatible semantics. It'll
> save everybody trouble long term. This means it wouldn't
> help on IA64 machines that don't have a DMA zone -- they
> would still need to validate drivers especially -- but at least
> the others.
There are no compatible semantics. ZONE_DMA may mean something different
for each arch depending on its need. An arch may not have a need for a 4GB
boundary (such as s390).
> Also from my driver review driver authors often seem to have
> trouble understanding what GFP_DMA really does. With GFP_DMA32 it
> is clearer that it applies to a address range and is not
> some synonym for pci_map_*
GFP_DMA32 is clear because there are no other arches to muddy up the
waters.
-
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]