Hi Sumit,
On Wednesday 25 January 2012 14:56:52 Semwal, Sumit wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > Hi Summit,
> >
> > Sorry for the late review. I know that this code is now in mainline, but
> > I still have a couple of comments. I'll send patches if you agree with
> > them.
>
> Hi Laurent,
>
> Thanks for your review; apologies for being late in replying - I was
> OoO for last couple of days.
No worries.
[snip]
> Let me know if you'd send patches for these, or should I just go ahead and
> correct.
I'll send patches.
Another small comment. The map_dma_buf operation is defined as
struct sg_table * (*map_dma_buf)(struct dma_buf_attachment *,
enum dma_data_direction);
If we want to let exporters cache the sg_table we should return a const struct
sg_table *. unmap_dma_buf will then take a const pointer as well, which would
need to be cast to a non-const pointer internally. What's your opinion on that
?
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
--
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>