lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Dec]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC] generic device DMA implementation
Date
From
adam@yggdrasil.com said:
> I like your term DMA_CONSISTENT better than DMA_CONFORMANCE_CONSISTANT
> . I think the word "conformance" in there does not reduce the time
> that it takes to figure out what the symbol means. I don't think any
> other facility will want to use the terms DMA_{,IN}CONSISTENT, so I
> prefer that we go with the more medium sized symbol.

I'm not so keen on this. The idea of this parameter is not to tell the
allocation routine what type of memory you would like, but to tell it what
type of memory the driver can cope with. I think for the inconsistent case,
DMA_INCONSISTENT looks like the driver is requiring inconsistent memory, and
expecting to get it. I'm open to changing the "CONFORMANCE" part, but I'd
like to name these parameters something that doesn't imply they're requesting
a type of memory.

James


-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:31    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans