From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S272235AbTHRSpC (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Aug 2003 14:45:02 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S272236AbTHRSpC (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Aug 2003 14:45:02 -0400 Received: from hq.pm.waw.pl ([195.116.170.10]:10459 "EHLO hq.pm.waw.pl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S272235AbTHRSo7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Aug 2003 14:44:59 -0400 To: "David S. Miller" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, zaitcev@redhat.com, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH] RFC: kills consistent_dma_mask References: <20030817233705.0bea9736.davem@redhat.com> <20030818054341.2ef07799.davem@redhat.com> <20030818094955.3aa5c1c2.davem@redhat.com> From: Krzysztof Halasa Date: 18 Aug 2003 20:21:48 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20030818094955.3aa5c1c2.davem@redhat.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org "David S. Miller" writes: > > No. The documentation states that consistent_dma_mask (and not dma_mask) > > will be used when doing pci_alloc_consistent(). > > Then the platforms need to implement the code. There is no problem with that, i.e. the changes are trivial (except for pci_map_*, but that's another story). I don't know if it wouldn't break something, though. x86-64 and ia64 are much less tested than i386 and the change would alter i386 behaviour to that of x86-64/ia64. Again: which driver uses the consistent_dma_mask and where I can find it? -- Krzysztof Halasa Network Administrator