From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 16:32:28 +1000 From: David Gibson To: linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org Subject: Re: Workaround for USB DMA bugs Message-ID: <20020404063228.GQ21034@zax> References: <3CABEFCE.8050006@embeddededge.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <3CABEFCE.8050006@embeddededge.com> Sender: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 01:16:46AM -0500, Dan Malek wrote: > > Jeremy Rosen wrote: > > > >can't we use the __GFP_DMA flag to specify that the area must have > >algnment enforced ? > > Maybe, but that isn't its intended use. > > >or did I misunderstand the use of this flag ? > > This flag is used on architectures that have memory only accessible > from the processor, not from a DMA device, to ensure a DMA device > gets a memory bank that it can access. More specifically it's used on x86 for old ISA devices. -- David Gibson | For every complex problem there is a david@gibson.dropbear.id.au | solution which is simple, neat and | wrong. -- H.L. Mencken http://www.ozlabs.org/people/dgibson ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/