From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Buesch Subject: Re: ssb: Fix DMA-API compilation for non-PCI systems Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 00:32:00 +0100 Message-ID: <200811110032.00814.mb@bu3sch.de> References: <20081110.135231.96349017.davem@davemloft.net> <200811102307.37838.mb@bu3sch.de> <20081110.145343.171487164.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from bu3sch.de ([62.75.166.246]:37377 "EHLO vs166246.vserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752650AbYKJXcZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:32:25 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20081110.145343.171487164.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Monday 10 November 2008 23:53:43 David Miller wrote: > Then those architectures need to fix their implementations, > simply. They aren't implementing the generic DMA interfaces > properly. Other subsystems do make use of the generic DMA > interfaces in this way. > > Even something as simple as checking for &pci_bus_type in the > dma_*() routines (like powerpc did for quite some time) is > enough to fix the problem. Yeah, sure. The architectures are broken. But the bugreports hit _my_ code. I got pretty tired of forwarding stuff to the arch maintainers, so I implemented something that does work in every situation. The bugreports stopped immediately (Except this tiny build failure that does only hit under rare circumstances). DMA is pretty much a mess, if you look at how ever arch does implement the API in a slightly different way. If somebody wants to fix this, I'm certainly OK with it. But for now we will have to live with SSB implementing a wrapper around the ssb-host-device DMA APIs. -- Greetings Michael.