Re: [PATCH] x86: adjust GFP mask handling for coherent allocations

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Jan Beulich <JBeulich@novell.com> wrote:

> >>> Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> 23.10.09 13:48 >>>
> >makes sense (although there were a few odd ends in various ISA sound 
> >driver details so this should go on the .33 not .32), but please 
> >introduce a cleaner construct, like a new DMA_ISA_BIT_MASK() or so.
> 
> Hmm, I could see DMA_ISA_BIT_MASK only replace DMA_BIT_MASK(24) (but 
> specifically not being conditional upon CONFIG_ISA) without becoming 
> confusing. Consequently this would eliminate the conditional in the .c 
> file. [...]
>
> Or did you have something else in mind that I just don't realize?

DMA_ISA_BIT_MASK was what i had in mind.

> And any attempt to eliminate the conditional another way would just 
> introduce a very similar conditional elsewhere; with this having a 
> single user (and foreseeably not ever a second one) I would think this 
> would just make the code less readable.

There's 3 other current uses of DMA_BIT_MASK(24) in arch/x86 - couldnt 
those use ISA_DMA_BIT_MASK too?

	Ingo