From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian.Campbell@citrix.com (Ian Campbell)
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2014 16:40:29 +0100
Subject: [PATCH v4 3/7] [RFC] arm/arm64: introduce is_dma_coherent
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1410251424350.22875@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
References: <1412941908-5850-3-git-send-email-stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
 <20141010120702.GI7755@arm.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1410101401250.17038@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1410131215400.17038@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
 <20141013125725.GA19156@arm.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1410131358490.17038@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1410221703560.876@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1410231516450.876@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
 <20141024104746.GC1955@localhost>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1410241233080.22875@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
 <20141024154353.GE20534@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1410241751160.22875@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1410241828110.22875@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1410251424350.22875@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
Message-ID: <1414251629.3584.20.camel@citrix.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Sat, 2014-10-25 at 14:29 +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>  
> Your suggestions and looking more at the code gave me another idea, that
> I think is clean and at the same time suitable for 3.18.
> What do you think of the following? It is simple, self-contained and
> doesn't need a new flag in struct device.

of_dma_is_coherent looks to be quite expensive though (walks up the
Device Tree doing strcmps on each property of each node until it finds
the one it is looking for.

Ian.