On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 03:38:12PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 03:03:25PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > --- a/include/linux/platform_device.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/platform_device.h
> > > @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ struct platform_device {
> > > int id;
> > > bool id_auto;
> > > struct device dev;
> > > + u64 dma_mask;
> >
> > Why is the dma_mask in 'struct device' which is part of this structure,
> > not sufficient here? Shouldn't the "platform" be setting that up
> > correctly already in the "archdata" type callback?
>
> Becaus the dma_mask in struct device is a pointer that needs to point
> to something, and this is the best space we can allocate for 'something'.
> m68k and powerpc currently do something roughly equivalent at the moment,
> while everyone else just has horrible, horrible hacks. As mentioned in
> the changelog the intent of this patch is that we treat platform devices
> like any other bus, where the bus allocates the space for the dma_mask.
> The long term plan is to eventually kill that weird pointer indirection
> that doesn't help anyone, but for that we need to sort out the basics
> first.
Ah, missed that, sorry. Ok, no objection from me. Might as well respin
this series and I can queue it up after 5.3-rc5 is out (which will have
your first 2 patches in it.)
thanks,
greg k-h
