From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Benoit Boissinot Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] remove unneeded check in bcm43xx Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 06:38:08 +0200 Message-ID: <20060410043808.GP27596@ens-lyon.fr> References: <20060410040120.GA4860@ens-lyon.fr> <200604100607.33362.mb@bu3sch.de> <20060410042228.GN27596@ens-lyon.fr> <200604100628.01483.mb@bu3sch.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linville@tuxdriver.com, benh@kernel.crashing.org Return-path: To: Michael Buesch Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200604100628.01483.mb@bu3sch.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 06:28:00AM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote: > On Monday 10 April 2006 06:22, you wrote: > > Either the ppc code is wrong (it doesn't enforce dma_mask) either the > > driver still works without the check. > > > > Maybe ppc should do the same thing as i386: > > > > 47 if (dev == NULL || (dev->coherent_dma_mask < 0xffffffff)) > > 48 gfp |= GFP_DMA; > > No, GFP_DMA is a NOP on PPC. > Actually the problems seems much more complex and a correct fix > seems to be hard to do. > I think benh is actually fixing this. > > To summerize: I actually added these messages, because people were > hitting "this does not work with >1G" issues and did not get an error message. > So I decided to insert warnings until the issue is fixed inside the arch code. > I will remove them once the issue is fixed. > Thanks for the explainations. Benoit -- powered by bash/screen/(urxvt/fvwm|linux-console)/gentoo/gnu/linux OS