On Fri, May 16, 2003 at 12:36:15PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote: > You mean we need an interface that is called when the CPU hands off the > region to the device and again when the CPU reclaims it (so we always > get the writeback or invalidate in the correct place). yes > How about just adding an ownership attribute to dma_sync..? It would > either be DMA_OWNER_CPU or DMA_OWNER_DEVICE? I prefer davem's suggestion of a different function call (*_to_cpu and *_to_dev) rather than making the same function do completely different things based on parameters. Keeps API documentation and resulting implementations for each smaller. > Of course, retrofitting something like this is going to be fun. It's not so bad. It's really only needed for non-coherent machines. Folks who care about those platforms probably already know where those calls belong. grantReceived on Fri May 16 11:00:53 2003
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:14 EST