From: gang.chen@asianux.com (Chen Gang)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] arch: arm64: include: asm: add pci.h to pass compiling
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 18:20:39 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51CC11F7.2060306@asianux.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9028702.KGsxCx1772@wuerfel>
On 06/27/2013 04:43 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 27 June 2013 08:30:40 Chen Gang wrote:
>> > On 06/26/2013 10:07 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>> > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 04:26:41AM +0100, Chen Gang wrote:
>>> > > I wonder whether it makes sense to include pci-dma-compat.h in
>>> > > asm-generic/pci.h, I don't see why one would want the generic pci.h but
>>> > > not the generic pci-dma-compat.h (cc'ing Arnd).
>> >
>> > I think, it will let architecture guys easier to add their own
>> > pci-dma-compat.h (although they still need generic pci_dma_compat.h, and
>> > generic pci.h, too).
>> >
>> > e.g. one architecture want include generic pci-dma-compat.h firstly,
>> > then define its own features in its own pci-dma-compat.h.
> I think there is no excuse for still keeping the asm-generic/pci-dma-compat.h
> header around any more.
>
> All architectures use the same implementation and have done so for years.
> We should just convert the remaining users to use the dma_mapping.h
> interfaces directly.
in "asm-generic/pci-dma-compat.h", it include "linux/dma-mapping.h" firstly.
So can we say it also has additional features (at least for compatible
old things) which "dma-mapping.h" not have ?
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch: arm64: include: asm: add pci.h to pass compiling
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 18:20:39 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51CC11F7.2060306@asianux.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9028702.KGsxCx1772@wuerfel>
On 06/27/2013 04:43 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 27 June 2013 08:30:40 Chen Gang wrote:
>> > On 06/26/2013 10:07 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>> > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 04:26:41AM +0100, Chen Gang wrote:
>>> > > I wonder whether it makes sense to include pci-dma-compat.h in
>>> > > asm-generic/pci.h, I don't see why one would want the generic pci.h but
>>> > > not the generic pci-dma-compat.h (cc'ing Arnd).
>> >
>> > I think, it will let architecture guys easier to add their own
>> > pci-dma-compat.h (although they still need generic pci_dma_compat.h, and
>> > generic pci.h, too).
>> >
>> > e.g. one architecture want include generic pci-dma-compat.h firstly,
>> > then define its own features in its own pci-dma-compat.h.
> I think there is no excuse for still keeping the asm-generic/pci-dma-compat.h
> header around any more.
>
> All architectures use the same implementation and have done so for years.
> We should just convert the remaining users to use the dma_mapping.h
> interfaces directly.
in "asm-generic/pci-dma-compat.h", it include "linux/dma-mapping.h" firstly.
So can we say it also has additional features (at least for compatible
old things) which "dma-mapping.h" not have ?
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-27 10:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-26 3:26 [PATCH] arch: arm64: include: asm: add pci.h to pass compiling Chen Gang
2013-06-26 3:26 ` Chen Gang
2013-06-26 14:07 ` Catalin Marinas
2013-06-26 14:07 ` Catalin Marinas
2013-06-27 0:30 ` Chen Gang
2013-06-27 0:30 ` Chen Gang
2013-06-27 2:05 ` Chen Gang
2013-06-27 2:05 ` Chen Gang
2013-06-27 3:47 ` Chen Gang
2013-06-27 3:47 ` Chen Gang
2013-06-27 8:43 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-06-27 8:43 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-06-27 10:20 ` Chen Gang [this message]
2013-06-27 10:20 ` Chen Gang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=51CC11F7.2060306@asianux.com \
--to=gang.chen@asianux.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.