From: Grant Grundler <iod00d@hp.com>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjanv@redhat.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>,
Jes Sorensen <jes@wildopensource.com>,
torvalds@transmeta.com, cngam@sgi.com, jeremy@sgi.com,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-ia64@linuxia64.org, wildos@sgi.com
Subject: Re: [Linux-ia64] Re: [patch] support 64 bit pci_alloc_consistent
Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 13:17:18 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030518201718.GB13855@cup.hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1053280195.10810.61.camel@mulgrave>
On Sun, May 18, 2003 at 12:49:49PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote:
> In that case, the platform returns zero to "this much" being less than
> the full 64 bits implying there's no mask the platform and driver can
> agree on.
My point was it's better if the driver always check the return
value regardless of which interface is ultimately agreed upon.
(in reference to whether "no one cares a flying fish".)
If one accepts that requirement, the only improvement in Arjen's proposal
is the platform DMA support can guess what might be better and make that
the "effective" mask. The driver still needs to check the effective mask.
I happen to agree with davem : redefining this interface in 2.5 for
a trivial improvement doesn't seem reasonable at this point.
a swimming fish,
grant
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-05-18 20:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-05-18 4:09 [patch] support 64 bit pci_alloc_consistent Jes Sorensen
2003-05-18 5:46 ` David S. Miller
2003-05-18 6:00 ` Andre Hedrick
2003-05-18 9:29 ` Arjan van de Ven
2003-05-18 9:35 ` David S. Miller
2003-05-18 9:43 ` Arjan van de Ven
2003-05-18 17:22 ` [Linux-ia64] " Grant Grundler
2003-05-18 17:49 ` James Bottomley
2003-05-18 20:17 ` Grant Grundler [this message]
2003-05-18 21:26 ` James Bottomley
2003-05-19 16:26 ` Grant Grundler
2003-05-18 14:17 ` James Bottomley
2003-05-18 14:21 ` Arjan van de Ven
2003-05-18 14:28 ` James Bottomley
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=20030518201718.GB13855@cup.hp.com \
--to=iod00d@hp.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com \
--cc=arjanv@redhat.com \
--cc=cngam@sgi.com \
--cc=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=jeremy@sgi.com \
--cc=jes@wildopensource.com \
--cc=linux-ia64@linuxia64.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
--cc=wildos@sgi.com \
/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