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

[FUJITA Tomonori]

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:58:14 +0000
"Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> >Well, in the first place, we don't need the #ifdef in Jan's patch. We
> >can always use DMA_BIT_MASK(24) for the fallback device.
> 
> But this one I don't agree with - the purpose of the patch is to not have
> a 24-bit (or 32-bit) mask here unconditionally: It would result in GFP_DMA
> to be forced on for the allocation (which the patch specifically eliminates),

If a driver doesn't want to GFP_DMA, it should set up the
dma_coherent_mask of the device and pass it. In fact, it should do. A
driver that uses the fallback device is broken.

Why can't you fix drivers that use the fallback instead of adding
another hack to the common place?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/