Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757473Ab1D1Jaz (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Apr 2011 05:30:55 -0400 Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:51097 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752074Ab1D1Jax (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Apr 2011 05:30:53 -0400 Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 10:30:39 +0100 From: Russell King - ARM Linux To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: Arnd Bergmann , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] ARM DMA mapping TODO, v1 Message-ID: <20110428093039.GU17290@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <201104212129.17013.arnd@arndb.de> <201104271302.44249.arnd@arndb.de> <20110427201605.GW17290@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <201104272221.48601.arnd@arndb.de> <20110427202603.GY17290@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <1303940467.2513.188.camel@pasglop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1303940467.2513.188.camel@pasglop> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1354 Lines: 32 On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 07:41:07AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > As I said above, I don't think bus code can do it. Take my example > > above of a tulip pci device on x86 and a tulip pci device on ARM. Both > > use the same PCI code. > > > > Maybe something in asm/pci.h - but that invites having lots of bus > > specific header files in asm/. > > > > A better solution imho would be to have an architecture callback for > > struct device which gets registered, which can inspect the type of > > the device, and set the flag depending on where it appears in the > > tree. > > Now -that's gross :-) > > For PCI you can have the flag propagate from the PHB down, for busses > without a bus type (platform) then whoever instanciate them (the > platform code) can set that appropriately. How can you do that when it changes mid-bus heirarchy? I'm thinking of the situation where the DRM stuff is on a child bus below the root bus, and the root bus has DMA coherent devices on it but the DRM stuff doesn't. Your solution doesn't allow that - and I believe that's what Arnd is talking about. -- 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/