On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 12:26:04 -0500 James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > As I wrote, there is only one user of this API and we can remove it > > easily. Then I'm not sure it's worth fixing dma_is_consistent() in > > many architectures. I prefer to add this to > > feature-removal-schedule.txt to see if driver writers oppose. > > Let me check our two drivers: lasi and 53c700; they're the only ones we > support on the architecture that can't do any coherence. I think we > don't need to tell because the dma_sync_cache calls which replace > coherent memory handling are indirected on the platform so we don't need > a global dma_is_coherent() flag. There is only one place where 53c700 uses dma_is_consistent() (lasi doesn't use it): BUG_ON(!dma_is_consistent(hostdata->dev, pScript) && L1_CACHE_BYTES < dma_get_cache_alignment()); I think that we can remove the above checking since the existing parisc systems that can't allocate coherent memory pass this checking. 53c700 and lasi call dma_cache_sync() unconditionally so we can live without dma_is_consistent(). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-parisc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
