From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH] asm-generic: add dma-mapping-linear.h Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 10:03:58 +0200 Message-ID: <200906081003.59171.arnd@arndb.de> References: <200906041235.34686.arnd@arndb.de> <200906041747.04310.arnd@arndb.de> <20090608144921R.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.171]:50115 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753256AbZFHIED (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Jun 2009 04:04:03 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090608144921R.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: FUJITA Tomonori Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org On Monday 08 June 2009, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > > > However, I don't think I have the energy to fix this problem, but > > I agree that it should be fixed eventually. I can leave out > > the declarations of dma_{free,alloc}_coherent from dma-mapping-linear.h > > so that the broken code remains in the architecture specific > > files, and change all references to dma_cache_sync to something > > else. The best I can think of is __dma_cache_sync() with the same > > calling conventions as dma_cache_sync(). Does that make sense? > > Sorry, but it doesn't make sense to me because __dma_cache_sync() hack > is against the goal of dma-mapping-linear.h, having a clean, ideal, > unified header file. Do you have any other suggestion? The operation that an architecture performs to synchronize the DMA buffer after a DMA is just not generic and needs to have some name that we can call from the generic file. Right now we use one of dma_cache_sync, frv_cache_wback_inv, mn10300_dcache_flush_inv or consistent_sync for this and I was just looking for a new internal name for this operation. Arnd <><