From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [Linaro-acpi] [V2 PATCH 2/5] arm64 : Introduce support for ACPI _CCA object Date: Tue, 05 May 2015 18:12:06 +0200 Message-ID: <8157862.NJP1L4Rh25@wuerfel> References: <1430838729-21572-1-git-send-email-Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com> <5126612.k0u2CL2zi5@wuerfel> <5548EB42.5010800@amd.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: Suravee Suthikulanit , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, catalin.marinas@arm.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, will.deacon@arm.com, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, lenb@kernel.org To: linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5548EB42.5010800@amd.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-crypto.vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 05 May 2015 11:09:38 Suravee Suthikulanit wrote: > > However, codes in several places are making use of dma_map_ops without > checking if the ops are NULL (i.e. > include/asm-generic/dma-mapping-common.h and in arch-specific > implementation). If setting it to NULL is what we are planning to > support, we would need to scrub the current code to put NULL check. > Also, would you consider if that is safe to do going forward? > > I mean the dma_mask pointer, not dma_map_ops. Arnd From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Tue, 05 May 2015 18:12:06 +0200 Subject: [Linaro-acpi] [V2 PATCH 2/5] arm64 : Introduce support for ACPI _CCA object In-Reply-To: <5548EB42.5010800@amd.com> References: <1430838729-21572-1-git-send-email-Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com> <5126612.k0u2CL2zi5@wuerfel> <5548EB42.5010800@amd.com> Message-ID: <8157862.NJP1L4Rh25@wuerfel> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tuesday 05 May 2015 11:09:38 Suravee Suthikulanit wrote: > > However, codes in several places are making use of dma_map_ops without > checking if the ops are NULL (i.e. > include/asm-generic/dma-mapping-common.h and in arch-specific > implementation). If setting it to NULL is what we are planning to > support, we would need to scrub the current code to put NULL check. > Also, would you consider if that is safe to do going forward? > > I mean the dma_mask pointer, not dma_map_ops. Arnd