On Fri, 22 Feb 2019 06:46:29 -0800
Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/mips/include/asm/dma-direct.h b/arch/mips/include/asm/dma-direct.h
> > index b5c240806e1b..bd11e7934df1 100644
> > --- a/arch/mips/include/asm/dma-direct.h
> > +++ b/arch/mips/include/asm/dma-direct.h
> > @@ -2,6 +2,8 @@
> > #ifndef _MIPS_DMA_DIRECT_H
> > #define _MIPS_DMA_DIRECT_H 1
> >
> > +#include <dma-direct.h>
> > +
> > static inline bool dma_capable(struct device *dev, dma_addr_t addr, size_t size)
> > {
> > if (!dev->dma_mask)
>
> How is your mach dma-direct.h scheme going to work, given that
> we already have non-inline declarations of __phys_to_dma / __dma_to_phys
> in this file?
the compiler is fine with the declarations, that's why I left the non-inline
prototypes as they are
> Also this really should go into a separate commit, and we should either
> have all of these functions inline or none. Having all of them out
> of line seemed a lot saner to me to avoid all the mach header mess.
hmm, so your inline version in include/linux/dma-direct.h is ok, while
doing the same for MIPS in an other header files isn't ? Sounds inconsistent
to me.
Anyway I'll move __phys_to_dma/__dma_to_phy into a fitting/new .c file in
the next version of the series.
Thomas.
--
SUSE Linux GmbH
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
