On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 23:17:22 +0100 Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 09:11:20PM -0500, Douglas Gilbert wrote: > > Andi Kleen wrote: > > >Instead of using GFP_DMA directly. > > > > > >Also I stubbed SG_SET_FORCE_LOW_DMA ioctls which don't make any sense > > >because the kernel should always use the correct values on its own. > > > > You propose removing a define from a public interface and thereby > > might break existing code. A comment in sg.h might be appropriate. > > Hmm, I assume those SG_SET_FORCE_* defines are only used > in the kernel. I don't think so. They are exported to userspace, the sg ioctl interface. There may be applications that use them. > Is there a realistic case where user space > could use them or are just just talking in general, objecting > to any change outside #ifdef __KERNEL__ ? Users can use them to avoid the block-layer bouncing with a driver doesn't set unchecked_isa_dma but can't dma with all the memory addresses. Well, I don't think that they are useful or a nice feature. They would become pointless when you finish your dma allocation rework. But I don't think that we can remove the existing API exported to userspace. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
