Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755992AbZJ0Bjb (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:39:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755206AbZJ0Bjb (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:39:31 -0400 Received: from sh.osrg.net ([192.16.179.4]:34408 "EHLO sh.osrg.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754246AbZJ0Bja (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:39:30 -0400 Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:38:18 +0900 To: mingo@elte.hu Cc: JBeulich@novell.com, yinghai@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, 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 From: FUJITA Tomonori In-Reply-To: <20091026201917.GE24682@elte.hu> References: <20091026152246.GB3749@elte.hu> <4AE5D238020000780001BD46@vpn.id2.novell.com> <20091026201917.GE24682@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20091027103758L.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (sh.osrg.net [192.16.179.4]); Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:38:20 +0900 (JST) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1582 Lines: 33 On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:19:17 +0100 Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Jan Beulich wrote: > > > >>> Ingo Molnar 26.10.09 16:22 >>> > > >* Jan Beulich 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. > > Well, can ISA_BIT_MASK fall back to DMA_BIT_MASK(32) on !CONFIG_ISA? If > we have ISA support disabled we might as well pretend the whole world is > PCI, right? I don't think that it works. At least, you can't do that with the DMA_BIT_MASK(24) in arch/x86/kernl/pci-dma.c; it must be DMA_BIT_MASK(24) even with !CONFIG_ISA. > That way we'd get rid of that #ifdef in the .c code too. Well, in the first place, we don't need the #ifdef in Jan's patch. We can always use DMA_BIT_MASK(24) for the fallback device. -- 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/