Re: [PATCH] RFC: kills consistent_dma_mask

David S. Miller
2003-08-18T06:37:16Z

On 18 Aug 2003 00:34:17 +0200
Krzysztof Halasa <khc@pm.waw.pl> wrote:

> The consistent_dma_mask (and set_... function) is presumably a hack
> which is currently not used by anything (at least in the official tree).
> It's unneeded (it can be easily done in a driver, should a need arrive,
> without polluting the PCI subsystem) and is not supported by "DMA" API.

ia64 does in fact need consistent_dma_mask.

> It isn't even implemented on most platforms - only x86_64 and ia64 have
> support for it, while on the remaining archs using it according to the
> docs (with non-default value) could mean Oops or something like that.

The platforms where it isn't implemented simply support
it identically to how they support the normal dma_mask.

Please read the threads in the archives that caused
consistent_dma_mask to be added to the tree in the first
place before you go around removing it.

Thanks.