Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 6 Dec 2002 15:04:45 -0600 | From | Oliver Xymoron <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] generic device DMA implementation |
| |
On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 10:42:21AM -0800, David S. Miller wrote: > From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com> > Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 12:40:49 -0600 > > Yes, we've discussed that too...but not come to a conclusion. The problem is > really that if you call dma_alloc and pass in the DMA_CONFORMANCE_NON_CONSISTEN > T flag, what you're saying is "This driver implements all the correct cache > flushes and can cope with inconsistent memory. Please give me the type of > memory that's most efficient for the platform I'm running on.". The driver > isn't asking give me a specific type of memory, it's telling the platform what > it's capabilities are. > > Any thoughts on naming would be most welcome. > > How about just making a dma_alloc_$(NEWNAME)(), and consistent ports > can just alias that to dma_alloc_consistent()? > > The only question is $(NEWNAME). "inconsistent" might be ok, but it's > maybe too similar to "consistent" for my taste.
Can we do pci_alloc_consistent -> dma_alloc? Then regardless of what you name the other one, the consistent version will obviously be prefered.
-- "Love the dolphins," she advised him. "Write by W.A.S.T.E.." - 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/
| |