From: Martin Dalecki <dalecki@evision-ventures.com>
To: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com>,
mochel@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BK PATCH] PCI reorg fix
Date: Thu, 09 May 2002 21:45:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3CDAD1C0.9090406@evision-ventures.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020509165234.GA17627@kroah.com>
Uz.ytkownik Greg KH napisa?:
> Linus,
>
> James pointed out that pci_alloc_consistent() and pci_free_consistent()
> are allowed to be called, even if CONFIG_PCI is not enabled. So this
> changeset moves these calls back into the arch/i386/kernel directory.
>
> Pull from: bk://linuxusb.bkbits.net/linux-2.5-pci
>
> As a side note, I don't think that any pci_* function should be able to
> be called by non-pci drivers. Is it worth spending the time now in 2.5
> to make these two functions not rely on 'struct pci_dev' and fix up all
> of the drivers and architectures and documentation to reflect this?
> Possible names would be alloc_consistent() and free_consistent()?
If your are at it: I was always itching my had what
pci_alloc_inconsistent and pci_free_inconsistent is supposed to be?
Negating semantically the consistent attribute shows nicely
that the _consistent is a bad nomenclatures. Perhaps something
more related to the purpose of it would help. Like
ioalloc() and iofree()
Could be even abstracted from the bus implementation.
And of course much less typing...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-05-09 20:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-05-08 23:11 Problems with 2.5.14 PCI reorg and non-PCI architectures James Bottomley
2002-05-09 8:44 ` Greg KH
2002-05-09 13:00 ` James Bottomley
2002-05-09 15:23 ` Greg KH
2002-05-09 16:47 ` James Bottomley
2002-05-09 16:52 ` [BK PATCH] PCI reorg fix Greg KH
2002-05-09 18:06 ` Patrick Mochel
2002-05-09 17:15 ` Greg KH
2002-05-09 18:26 ` James Bottomley
2002-05-09 18:23 ` Kai Germaschewski
2002-05-09 18:26 ` Patrick Mochel
2002-05-09 18:46 ` Kai Germaschewski
2002-05-09 19:45 ` Martin Dalecki [this message]
2002-05-09 21:34 ` James Bottomley
2002-05-09 20:51 ` Martin Dalecki
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=3CDAD1C0.9090406@evision-ventures.com \
--to=dalecki@evision-ventures.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@steeleye.com \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mochel@osdl.org \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.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