Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 25 Apr 2006 08:58:10 -0500 | From | Jon Mason <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] x86-64: trivial gart clean-up |
| |
On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 08:26:07AM +0300, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote: > On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 12:42:43AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > On Tuesday 25 April 2006 00:53, Jon Mason wrote: > > > A trivial change to have gart_unmap_sg call gart_unmap_single directly, > > > instead of bouncing through the dma_unmap_single wrapper in > > > dma-mapping.h. This change required moving the gart_unmap_single above > > > gart_unmap_sg, and under gart_map_single (which seems a more logical > > > place that its current location IMHO). > > > > What advantage does that have? I think I prefer the old code. > > I don't know what Jon had in mind, but we do avoid a call through a > function pointer this way. I agree with Jon that it also makes more > sense - gart code can just call the gart code directly, without going > through the dma_xxx wrapper that ends up calling it anyway.
Yes, that is exactly what I was trying to say in my comment above. Sorry for the confusion, and thanks for clearing it up Muli.
The dma_unmap_single call is the only dma_XXX type call in the gart code. All other calls use the gart_XXX equivalent. It seems to me that this was an oversight. Also, the dma_XXX type calls go through a wrapper in asm/dma-mapping.h, which translates this call to the gart equivalent. It also makes the code 8 bytes smaller :)
Thanks, Jon
> > Cheers, > Muli > -- > Muli Ben-Yehuda > http://www.mulix.org | http://mulix.livejournal.com/ > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |