From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail144.messagelabs.com (mail144.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2756C6B003D for ; Thu, 30 Apr 2009 23:26:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: by gxk20 with SMTP id 20so3559365gxk.14 for ; Thu, 30 Apr 2009 20:26:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20090428090129.17081.782.sendpatchset@rx1.opensource.se> References: <20090428090129.17081.782.sendpatchset@rx1.opensource.se> Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 12:26:38 +0900 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] videobuf-dma-contig: zero copy USERPTR support V2 From: Magnus Damm Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: linux-media@vger.kernel.org Cc: hverkuil@xs4all.nl, linux-mm@kvack.org, Magnus Damm , lethal@linux-sh.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org List-ID: On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 6:01 PM, Magnus Damm wrote: > This is V2 of the V4L2 videobuf-dma-contig USERPTR zero copy patch. I guess the V4L2 specific bits are pretty simple. As for the minor mm modifications below, > --- 0001/mm/memory.c > +++ work/mm/memory.c =A0 =A02009-04-28 14:56:43.000000000 +0900 > @@ -3009,7 +3009,6 @@ int in_gate_area_no_task(unsigned long a > > =A0#endif /* __HAVE_ARCH_GATE_AREA */ > > -#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_IOREMAP_PROT > =A0int follow_phys(struct vm_area_struct *vma, > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0unsigned long address, unsigned int flags, > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0unsigned long *prot, resource_size_t *phys= ) Is it ok with the memory management guys to always build follow_phys()? > @@ -3063,7 +3062,9 @@ unlock: > =A0out: > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0return ret; > =A0} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(follow_phys); > > +#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_IOREMAP_PROT > =A0int generic_access_phys(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr= , > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0void *buf, int len, int wr= ite) > =A0{ How about exporting follow_phys()? This because the user videobuf-dma-contig.c can be built as a module. Should I use EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() instead of EXPORT_SYMBOL()? Any comments? Thanks, / magnus -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org