On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 01:55:22AM +0100, Laura Abbott wrote: > On 6/5/2014 10:05 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 09:03:52PM +0100, Laura Abbott wrote: > >> Neither CMA nor noncoherent allocations support atomic allocations. > >> Add a dedicated atomic pool to support this. > > > > CMA indeed doesn't support atomic allocations but swiotlb does, the only > > problem being the vmap() to create a non-cacheable mapping. Could we not > > use the atomic pool only for non-coherent allocations? > > CMA needs the atomic pool for both non-coherent and coherent allocations. > Perhaps I should update the code so we only create the coherent atomic > pool if CMA is used. It's also needed with non-coherent swiotlb because of vmap (but coherent is fine). -- Catalin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
