On Wednesday 16 July 2014 11:15:33 Antoine Ténart wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 10:41:10AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Wednesday 16 July 2014 10:26:01 Antoine Ténart wrote:
> > > +
> > > + if (priv->dma_mask) {
> > > + ret = dma_coerce_mask_and_coherent(&pdev->dev, priv->dma_mask);
> > > + if (ret)
> > > + return ret;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > >
> >
> > As mentioned in my comment for the binding, this is the wrong way to do it.
> > Russell has in the past converted all drivers that did this manually to
> > do dma_coerce_mask_and_coherent() so we can spot them more easily, but we
> > should really be doing this better for new drivers.
> >
> > Can you describe what the restriction is that you want to put on the dma mask?
>
> Some people wanted the possibility to set the DMA mask as this USB2 CI
> driver does not do specific Berlin operation and can be reused later.
> I don't particularly need to call dma_coerce_mask_and_coherent() in my
> case, as far as I know.
Ok, just remove the call then and rely on the default mask.
> They can maybe give the restrictions they might want to put on the DMA
> mask.
If the restriction is from the bus, it should get handled automatically
by the device probe as long as the correct dma-ranges property is there
(though we have a small bug there at the moment). If there is a variation
of ci13xxx that can't do 32-bit DMA, that should use a different compatible
string and pass a fixed mask into dma_set_mask_and_coherent() based on
the device.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
