From: Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: Change archdata dma_data type to dma_addr_t
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 00:08:45 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1251295725.7492.5.camel@concordia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1251289790.1379.71.camel@pasglop>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1199 bytes --]
On Wed, 2009-08-26 at 22:29 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-08-24 at 21:48 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 11:17:14AM -0500, Becky Bruce wrote:
> > > Previously, this was specified as a void *, but that's not
> > > large enough on 32-bit systems with 36-bit physical
> > > addressing support. Change the type to dma_addr_t so it
> > > will scale based on the size of a dma address.
> >
> > This looks extreml ugly to me. It seems like the typical use is to
> > store a pointer to a structure. So what about making the direct
> > dma case follow that general scheme instead?
> >
> > E.g. declare a
> >
> > struct direct_dma_data {
> > dma_addr_t direct_dma_offset;
> > };
> >
> > and have one normal instace of it, and one per weird cell device.
>
> Right, but we want to avoid a structure for the classic case of 32-bit
> systems with no iommu...
>
> I wouldn't mind doing a union here.
That might be best, the patch as it stands is a horrible mess of casts.
Stashing a dma_addr_t into a void * is sort of gross, but storing a
pointer to some struct (a void *) in a dma_addr_t is _really_ gross :)
cheers
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-26 14:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-24 16:17 [PATCH] powerpc: Change archdata dma_data type to dma_addr_t Becky Bruce
2009-08-24 19:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-08-26 12:29 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2009-08-26 14:08 ` Michael Ellerman [this message]
2009-08-26 20:20 ` Becky Bruce
2009-08-27 0:24 ` Michael Ellerman
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=1251295725.7492.5.camel@concordia \
--to=michael@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).