From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Russell King Subject: Re: [PATCH] Kill dma_is_consistent() Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 16:06:17 +0000 Message-ID: <20061123160617.GC8984@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20061123150312.GA32406@linux-mips.org> <1164297574.2829.9.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([217.147.92.249]:46347 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933848AbWKWQGZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Nov 2006 11:06:25 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1164297574.2829.9.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: James Bottomley Cc: Ralf Baechle , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 09:59:33AM -0600, James Bottomley wrote: > On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 15:03 +0000, Ralf Baechle wrote: > > dma_is_consistent() is ill-designed in that it does not have a struct device > > argument which makes proper support for systems that consist of a mix of > > coherent and non-coherent DMA devices hard. > > At the time the interface was designed, the general consensus was that > it was easier to recognise incoherent memory regions by their address > range than by which device they came from. The main proponent of this > being arm, if I remember rightly. I don't remember that being particularly discussed, and it seems that no one has implemented it (but possibly implemented their own stuff in arch private code.) -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: