Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 7 Apr 2009 11:24:39 +0900 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 5/7] swiotlb: (re)Create swiotlb_unmap_single | From | FUJITA Tomonori <> |
| |
On Fri, 3 Apr 2009 20:56:47 -0500 Becky Bruce <beckyb@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> This mirrors the current swiotlb_sync_single() setup > where the swiotlb_unmap_single() function is static to this > file and contains the logic required to determine if we need > to call actual sync_single. Previously, swiotlb_unmap_page > and swiotlb_unmap_sg were duplicating very similar code. > The duplicated code has also been reformatted for > readability. > > Note that the swiotlb_unmap_sg code was previously doing > a complicated comparison to determine if an addresses needed > to be unmapped where a simple is_swiotlb_buffer() call > would have sufficed. > > Signed-off-by: Becky Bruce <beckyb@kernel.crashing.org> > --- > lib/swiotlb.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++------------- > 1 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lib/swiotlb.c b/lib/swiotlb.c > index af2ec25..602315b 100644 > --- a/lib/swiotlb.c > +++ b/lib/swiotlb.c
I don't think 'swiotlb_unmap_single' name is appropriate.
swiotlb_unmap_single sounds like an exported function that IOMMUs can use (and it was) however it should not be.
| |