On Saturday 08 August 2015 13:31:02 Duc Dang wrote: > > > > If we know that pdev->dev.dma_mask will always be initialised at this > > point, then the above change is fine. If not, it's introducing a > > regression - dma_set_mask_and_coherent() will fail if pdev->dev.dma_mask > > is NULL (depending on the architectures implementation of dma_set_mask()). > > > > Prefixing the above change with the two lines I mention above would > > ensure equivalent behaviour. Even if we do want to get rid of this, > > I'd advise to do it as a separate patch after this change, which can > > be independently reverted if there's problems with its removal. > > > Hi Russell, > > I will add the 2 lines you mentioned back to next version of the > patch. It is safer to do it that way as I do not see > pdev->dev.dma_mask gets initialized before the call > dma_set_mask_and_coherent inside this xhci_plat.c file. It would be good to add a WARN_ON() to the case where dma_mask is a NULL pointer at the least. That way, we will at least find out if there are some broken platforms that do not correctly initialize the mask pointer. 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
