[lkml]   [2002]   [Feb]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: pci_pool reap?

On Tue, 2002-02-12 at 16:48, Russell King wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 04:36:34PM +0100, Daniel Stodden wrote:
> > ARM does GFP_KERNEL, and then __ioremaps the underlying pages.
> > ugh. is that the only way to get the area coherent?
> Yes. Cache bits are in the page tables, and it would be idiotic to
> manipulate the cache bits on a 1MB granularity over the kernel
> direct mapped space.
> > furthermore i don't see why this could not be interrupt safe.
> GFP_KERNEL in the page table allocation functions mainly. We've been
> around and around this recently on this mailing list, so I'm not going
> to say anything further. I don't want another long discussion about
> this subject taking my time away from doing real work on ARM. If you're
> really interested in the outcome, please examine the lkml archives.

ok. i read part of the old thread now. sorry. didn't know that this had
already been issued.

so, based on the fact that
1. _most_ archs can easily do atomically.
2. those which don't aren't necessarily the better ones.
3. many drivers may prefer/be able to alloc through during
3.5 some may not.
4. even on arm, __ioremap() takes a gfp for quite some time now
and nobody seems to disagree.

then why does pci_alloc_consistent() not just take gfp flags and people
put in what their personal preference is?



[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:24    [W:0.062 / U:0.064 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site