Re: [PATCH] arm: dma-mapping: move consistent_init to early_initcall

[Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>]

On 12/17/10 15:14, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>> Russell,
>>>
>>> I agree with your point about using an API for purpose and not property.
>>> But I read Catalin's proposal as, let's treat secure domain as another
>>> DMA
>>> "device". If we make a conscious agreement to do that, then using the
>>> DMA
>>> API for secure domain would be "using it for its purpose" and we will
>>> make
>>> an effort to not break it with future updates. Of course, if we don't
>>> agree on that proposal, then we can't use the DMA API for secure domain
>>> stuff.
>>
>> If there is no better proposal, I'm for such extension to the DMA API.
>>  From the kernel perspecitve, the secure side is just another entity
>> that accesses the RAM directly. It's not a physically separate device
>> indeed but from a direct memory access perspective it can be treated
>> as any other device.
>>
>> In the DMA API we can fall back to the non-coherent ops when a NULL
>> struct device is passed. I assume in your code you already pass a NULL
>> device to dma_alloc_coherent().
>
> Russell,
>
> Would the extension of the DMA API as described above be acceptable to
> you? If not, can you please suggest an alternative that's acceptable to
> you?

Ping...

-Saravana

-- 
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.