On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 02:00:15PM +0800, Chunming Zhou wrote:
> it will be used to check if the driver needs swiotlb
>
> Change-Id: Idbe47af8f12032d4803bb3d47273e807f19169c3
> Signed-off-by: Chunming Zhou <david1.zhou@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> include/drm/drm_cache.h | 13 +++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/drm/drm_cache.h b/include/drm/drm_cache.h
> index beab0f0d0cfb..442c9ba63d03 100644
> --- a/include/drm/drm_cache.h
> +++ b/include/drm/drm_cache.h
> @@ -39,6 +39,19 @@ void drm_clflush_pages(struct page *pages[], unsigned long num_pages);
> void drm_clflush_sg(struct sg_table *st);
> void drm_clflush_virt_range(void *addr, unsigned long length);
>
> +static inline u64 drm_get_max_iomem(void)
> +{
> + struct resource *tmp;
> + u64 max_iomem = 0;
> +
> + for (tmp = iomem_resource.child; tmp; tmp = tmp->sibling) {
> + max_iomem = max(max_iomem, tmp->end);
> + }
> +
> + return max_iomem;
> +}
linux-next noticed a compile warning on this (on some platforms, the
max_iomem has the wrong integer size I think). Also, drm_memory.c is a bit
a grab-bag of legacy stuff, not sure this is the best place. We're also
lacking kerneldoc (plus include stanza) for this new function.
Can you pls fix all that in a follow-up patch?
Thanks, Daniel
> +
> +
> static inline bool drm_arch_can_wc_memory(void)
> {
> #if defined(CONFIG_PPC) && !defined(CONFIG_NOT_COHERENT_CACHE)
> --
> 2.14.1
>
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
