Re: [V2 PATCH 2/5] arm64 : Introduce support for ACPI _CCA object

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Suravee,

On 05/05/15 16:12, Suravee Suthikulpanit wrote:
 From http://www.uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/ACPI_6.0.pdf,
section 6.2.17 _CCA states that ARM platforms require ACPI _CCA
object to be specified for DMA-cabpable devices. This patch introduces
ACPI_MUST_HAVE_CCA in arm64 Kconfig to specify such requirement.

In this case of missing _CCA, arm64 would assign dummy_dma_ops
to disable DMA capability of the device.

Signed-off-by: Mark Salter <msalter@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@xxxxxxx>
---

[...]
+static void __dummy_sync_single_for_cpu(struct device *dev,
+					dma_addr_t dev_addr, size_t size,
+					enum dma_data_direction dir)
+{
+}
+
+static void __dummy_sync_single_for_device(struct device *dev,
+					   dma_addr_t dev_addr, size_t size,
+					   enum dma_data_direction dir)
+{
+}

Minor point, but I don't see the need to have multiple dummy functions with identical signatures - just have a generic dummy_sync_single and assign it to both ops.

+static void __dummy_sync_sg_for_cpu(struct device *dev,
+				    struct scatterlist *sgl, int nelems,
+				    enum dma_data_direction dir)
+{
+}
+
+static void __dummy_sync_sg_for_device(struct device *dev,
+				       struct scatterlist *sgl, int nelems,
+				       enum dma_data_direction dir)
+{
+}

Ditto here with dummy_sync_sg.

I wonder if there's any argument for putting the dummy DMA ops somewhere common, like drivers/base/dma-mapping.c?

Robin.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Kernel]     [Gnu Classpath]     [Gnu Crypto]     [DM Crypt]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]

  Powered by Linux