On 05/22/2013 04:37 AM, Damian Hobson-Garcia wrote:
> Hello,
> On 2013/04/30 12:01, Damian Hobson-Garcia wrote:
>> Most architectures that define CONFIG_HAVE_DMA=y, have implementations for
>> both dma_alloc_attrs() and dma_free_attrs(). All achitectures that do
>> not define CONFIG_HAVE_DMA also have both of these definitions provided by
>> dma-mapping-broken.h.
>>
>> Provide a default definition for the archs that define CONFIG_HAVE_DMA=y,
>> but have no implementation for dma_{alloc,free}_attrs().
>>
>> As I don't have hardware for any of these systems, the patches are only
>> compile-tested where I could (arm64, s390) and untested for the archs
>> where I couldn't find a readily available prebuilt cross-compiler (c6x, parisc).
>>
>
>
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/dma-mapping.h | 17 +++++++++++------
>> arch/c6x/include/asm/dma-mapping.h | 3 +++
>> arch/parisc/include/asm/dma-mapping.h | 3 +++
>> arch/s390/include/asm/dma-mapping.h | 17 +++++++++++------
>> 4 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>
>
> Since this series spans several architectures, what would be the best
> way to have this patch series merged?
> Should I resubmit each patch to the mailing list for each architecture
> separately?
I already pushed the parisc change upstream.
See commit 7f64fb41aad9a8504dd76e81b2391eae64e1498a
Helge
--
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
