On 28/10/2014 3:54 p.m., Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tuesday 28 October 2014 13:41:30 Adrian Hunter wrote:
On 28/10/14 12:18, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tuesday 28 October 2014 12:05:30 Adrian Hunter wrote:
On 28/10/14 11:43, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tuesday 28 October 2014 10:37:20 Adrian Hunter wrote:
static int sdhci_acpi_enable_dma(struct sdhci_host *host)
{
- return 0;
+ struct sdhci_acpi_host *c = sdhci_priv(host);
+ struct device *dev = &c->pdev->dev;
+ int err = -1;
+
+ if (c->dma_setup)
+ return 0;
+
+ if (host->flags & SDHCI_USE_64_BIT_DMA) {
+ if (host->quirks2 & SDHCI_QUIRK2_BROKEN_64_BIT_DMA) {
+ host->flags &= ~SDHCI_USE_64_BIT_DMA;
+ } else {
+ err = dma_set_mask_and_coherent(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(64));
+ if (err)
+ dev_warn(dev, "Failed to set 64-bit DMA mask\n");
+ }
+ }
+
+ if (err)
+ err = dma_set_mask_and_coherent(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(32));
+
+ c->dma_setup = !err;
+
+ return err;
}
I don't think it's worth a dev_warn() message (maybe dev_info), there is nothing
It is worth a dev_warn because 32-bit DMA can allocate memory for bounce
buffers which jeopardizes memory reclaim.
Then you should also warn if SDHCI_USE_64_BIT_DMA isn't or if
SDHCI_QUIRK2_BROKEN_64_BIT_DMA is set I guess.
The warning is for when the controller supports 64-bit, not when it doesn't.
But why warn about a feature of the controller being present? You just
said it's a problem for memory reclaim if 64-bit DMA is not supported.
The warning is for when the controller supports 64-bit but it can't
get a 64-bit DMA mask, and might therefore need to bounce things.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
