Message-Id: <4AE5D238020000780001BD46@vpn.id2.novell.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:45:44 +0000
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@novell.com>
To: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: "Yinghai Lu" <yinghai@kernel.org>, <tglx@linutronix.de>,
       "Takashi Iwai" <tiwai@suse.de>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>, <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: adjust GFP mask handling for coherent
	 allocations
References: <4AE06644020000780001B4AD@vpn.id2.novell.com>
 <20091023114825.GH5886@elte.hu>
 <4AE5CA8C020000780001BD09@vpn.id2.novell.com>
 <20091026152246.GB3749@elte.hu>
In-Reply-To: <20091026152246.GB3749@elte.hu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 891
Lines: 21

>>> Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> 26.10.09 16:22 >>>
>* Jan Beulich <JBeulich@novell.com> wrote:
>> And any attempt to eliminate the conditional another way would just 
>> introduce a very similar conditional elsewhere; with this having a 
>> single user (and foreseeably not ever a second one) I would think this 
>> would just make the code less readable.
>
>There's 3 other current uses of DMA_BIT_MASK(24) in arch/x86 - couldnt 
>those use ISA_DMA_BIT_MASK too?

Oh, so you didn't mean me to eliminate the conditional in pci-dma.c, but
just to replace the DMA_BIT_MASK(24) here an elsewhere. Sure, I'm fine
with adding this to the patch.

Jan

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/