Hello Tejun,
On 17/05/14 00:08, Tejun Heo wrote:
Don't we wanna map the underlying operation - dma_map_single_attrs() -
instead?
I'll resubmit this patch promptly, with a follow-up patch for the diff
to implement dmam_map_single_attrs() instead. Plus a define-statement
for dmam_map_single(). I can't test the case of a non-NULL value for
@attrs however.
+ if (dma_mapping_error(dev, dma_handle)) {
+ devres_free(dr);
+ return 0;
Can't we just keep returning dma_handle? Even if that means invoking
->mapping_error() twice? It's yucky to have subtly different error
return especially because in most cases it won't fail.
Yucky it is indeed. There are however two problems with keeping the
existing API:
* What to do if devres_alloc() fails. How do I signal back an error? The
only way I can think of is returning zero. But if the caller should know
that zero means failure, I've already broken the API. I might as well
return zero for any kind of failure.
* It seems like a lot of dma_mapping_error() implementations always
return no-error, since the DMA mapping can't fail on specific
architectures. If callers use dma_mapping_error(), the possible
devres_alloc() failure will be missed.
By the way, where I've seen dma_mapping_error() doing something, it
checks for dma_handle == 0.
Submitting updated patches for the DMA mapping part soon.
Regards,
Eli
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel