On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 09:58:39AM +0200, Grant Likely wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxx> wrote: >> > diff --git a/drivers/of/platform.c b/drivers/of/platform.c >> > index ed5a6d3..172d4a9 100644 >> > --- a/drivers/of/platform.c >> > +++ b/drivers/of/platform.c >> > @@ -204,7 +204,12 @@ struct platform_device *of_platform_device_create_pdata( >> > #if defined(CONFIG_MICROBLAZE) >> > dev->archdata.dma_mask = 0xffffffffUL; >> > #endif >> > - dev->dev.coherent_dma_mask = DMA_BIT_MASK(32); >> > + >> > + if (parent) >> > + dma_set_coherent_mask(&dev->dev, parent->coherent_dma_mask); >> > + else >> > + dma_set_coherent_mask(&dev->dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(32)); >> > + >> >> Right, this does need to be fixed. The existing code just matched >> what the historical powerpc code did, but it is certainly not correct. > > should I send patch above correctly ? Or do you want to also solve > 32-bit coherent mask altogether ? What are your plans for that ? Add a > separate property to pass coherent_mask size (32-bit, 64-bit, etc) ? i don't know. I'm not the expert on how the coherent mask should be set. Your patch does look sane as a starting point, but it bears looking at by someone more cluefull than me. In particular, someone should investigate if the dma mask can be calculated from a dma-ranges property. g. -- 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
