From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 02:16:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 02:16:19 -0400 Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:19686 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 02:16:18 -0400 Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 08:20:57 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Paul Mackerras Cc: benh@kernel.crashing.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] highmem I/O for ide-pmac.c Message-ID: <20020912062057.GK30234@suse.de> References: <15743.15275.412038.388540@argo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20020911130209.GL1089@suse.de> <15744.12392.868240.502920@argo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <15744.12392.868240.502920@argo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Sep 12 2002, Paul Mackerras wrote: > Jens Axboe writes: > > > Doesn't look like it's needed at all, at least you never turn on highmem > > I/O with ide_toggle_bounce() :-) > > Foo, neither I do. :( > > > BTW, it would be ok to export that from ide-dma.c instead of duplicating > > it in ide-pmac. > > Looking at it again, both ide_build_sglist and ide_raw_build_sglist do > *almost* what we want. If ide-pmac used hwif->sg_table instead of > pmif->sg_table, and if ide_[raw_]build_sglist were exported and took > the maximum number of entries as a parameter instead of using the > PRD_ENTRIES constant, then ide-pmac wouldn't need to have its own > versions of those routines. Would those changes be OK? Sounds like a perfectly fine change to me. > Ben, any reason why we have to use pmif->sg_table rather than > hwif->sg_table? Looks identical to me. hwif->sg_table is kmalloc'ed sg list of PRD_ENTRIES (256), pmif->sg_table is kmalloc'ed ditto of MAX_DCMDS (256) entries. -- Jens Axboe