Re: Regarding consistent_alloc

[Wolfgang Denk <wd@denx.de>]

In message <3DF8420A.4040409@intracom.gr> you wrote:
>
> They only reason that I considered the consistent() routines was
> that the 8xx routines are unsuitable for use in modules.

This  is  trivial  to  fix  -  just  add  the  missing  EXPORT_SYMBOL
statements  to  arch/ppc/kernel/ppc_ksyms.c  ;  but be aware that the
current implementation will leak CPM resources upon module  unload  -
which  is probably the main reason that these symbols are not expoted
for use in modules.

> I will prepare a patch that deals with the inefficiencies
> of the 8xx routines.

Don't re-invent the wheel. There is an implementation  of  this  code
available  in  our  kernel  source tree (linux-2.4 module in our CVS)
which for example provides both m8xx_cpm_dpalloc / m8xx_cpm_dpfree

I sent the patches to Tom Rini. Several times. I don't know why  they
never  made  it into the official kernel source tree. [This is why we
have to maintain our own source tree.]


Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

--
Software Engineering:  Embedded and Realtime Systems,  Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87  Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88  Email: wd@denx.de
The C-shell doesn't parse. It adhoculates.
    - Casper.Dik@Holland.Sun.COM in <3ol96k$b2j@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM>

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/