On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 10:21:46AM -0500, Ramirez Luna, Omar wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 7:57 PM, KyongHo Cho <pullip.cho@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 11:24 PM, Marek Szyprowski > ... > >> Right now I have no idea how to handle this better. Perhaps with should be > >> possible > >> to specify somehow the target dma_address when doing memory allocation, but I'm > >> not > >> really convinced yet if this is really required. > >> > > What about using 'dma_handle' argument of alloc_coherent callback of > > dma_map_ops? > > Although it is an output argument, I think we can convey a hint or > > start address to map > > to the IO memory manager that resides behind dma API. > > I also thought on this one, even dma_map_single receives a void *ptr > which could be casted into a struct with both physical and virtual > addresses to be mapped, but IMHO, this starts to add twists into the > dma map parameters which might create confusion. No - don't even consider that. That's highly non-standard usage and it'll break all existing drivers to do so. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>