On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 08:18:15 +0200 Jens Axboe <jaxboe@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 01 2010, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > > On Tue, 1 Jun 2010 20:24:52 +0200 > > Jens Axboe <jaxboe@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Mon, May 31 2010, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > > > > This patchset removes useless ISA_DMA_THRESHOLD: > > > > > > > > - ISA_DMA_THRESHOLD is irrelevant to the majority of architectures but > > > > they have to define it. > > > > > > > > - ISA_DMA_THRESHOLD definition is inconsistent on architectures; ISA > > > > DMA addressing restriction, DMA addressing restriction or something > > > > else. > > > > > > > > - Everyone (except for SCSI) uses dma_mask instead of ancient > > > > ISA_DMA_THRESHOLD. > > > > > > > > Only SCSI uses ISA_DMA_THRESHOLD for ancient drivers with non-zero > > > > unchecked_isa_dma. We can safely remove ISA_DMA_THRESHOLD usage in > > > > SCSI. So we can clean up ISA_DMA_THRESHOLD on the whole tree. > > > > > > Looks good. James, it's probably easier if I just carry this patch set. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Any tree works for me, I thought about -mm though. > > > > Can you replace [1/3] with the following? > > > > I fixed the subject and the body, s/aha1532/aha1542/; > > > > Somehow I forgot to remove unused BAD_SG_DMA(). > > I'll collect the acks and include this update. Can you send this to -next via your tree? I want this to be compile-tested on -next on various architectures. Thanks, -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
