On 05/07/2013 08:54 PM, Peter Chen wrote: >> >> This probably could be initialized from some DT property. However, >> there's no such property defined right now, and considering that DT is >> supposed to be an ABI, we'd always need the code in this patch as a >> fallback for DTs that were created before any such property was defined. >> >> Equally, since the data is SoC-specific rather than board-specific, and >> is even fairly unlikely to vary between SoC versions since these values >> are all 0xffffffff anyway, I don't really see much point in putting it >> into DT, rather than just putting the static data into the driver. > > I mean there is already dev->dev.coherent_dma_mask = DMA_BIT_MASK(32); > at function of_platform_device_create, why can't add > dev->dev.dma_mask = &dev->dev.coherent_dma_mask after that? > > If DT core can do above things, can we delete dma_mask assignment > at every driver? Perhaps. However, such a change has a much larger potential for regressions. I would suggest going with the current patch for 3.10 and any later backports in order to reduce risk. We can revisit better cleanup for later kernels. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
