Messages in this thread | | | From | "Adam J. Richter" <> | Date | Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:38:51 -0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] generic device DMA (dma_pool update) |
| |
Andrew Morton wrote: >"Adam J. Richter" wrote: >> >> David Brownell wrote: >> >> >struct dma_pool *dma_pool_create(char *, struct device *, size_t) >> >void dma_pool_destroy (struct dma_pool *pool) >> >void *dma_pool_alloc(struct dma_pool *, int mem_flags, dma_addr_t *) >> >void dma_pool_free(struct dma_pool *, void *, dma_addr_t) >> >> I would like to be able to have failure-free, deadlock-free >> blocking memory allocation, such as we have with the non-DMA mempool >> library so that we can guarantee that drivers that have been >> successfully initialized will continue to work regardless of memory >> pressure, and reduce error branches that drivers have to deal with. >> >> Such a facility could be layered on top of your interface >> perhaps by extending the mempool code to pass an extra parameter >> around. If so, then you should think about arranging your interface >> so that it could be driven with as little glue as possible by mempool. >>
>What is that parameter? The size, I assume.
No, dma address. All allocations in a memory pool (in both the mempool and pci_pool sense) are the same size.
Adam J. Richter __ ______________ 575 Oroville Road adam@yggdrasil.com \ / Milpitas, California 95035 +1 408 309-6081 | g g d r a s i l United States of America "Free Software For The Rest Of Us." - 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/
| |