Hi David,
On Tuesday, 26 September 2017 19:52:44 PDT David Miller wrote:
> From: Paul Burton <paul.burton@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 14:30:33 -0700
>
> > I'd suggest that at a minimum if you're unwilling to obey the API as
> > described in Documentation/DMA-API.txt then it would be beneficial
> > if you could propose a change to it such that it works for you, and
> > perhaps we can extend the API & its documentation to allow your
> > usage whilst also allowing us to catch broken uses.
>
> The networking driver code works fine as is.
>
> I also didn't write that ill-advised documentation in the DMA docs,
> nor the non-merged new MIPS assertion.
>
> So I'm trying to figure out on what basis I am required to do
> anything.
>
> Thank you.
Nobody said you wrote the documentation, but you do maintain code which
disobeys the documented DMA API & now you're being an ass about it
unnecessarily.
Nobody said that you are required to do anything, I suggested that it would be
beneficial if you were to suggest a change to the documented DMA API such that
it allows your usage where it currently does not. If you don't want to have
any input into that, and you actually think that your current approach of
ignoring the documented API is the best path forwards, then we're probably
done here & I'll be making a note to avoid yourself & anything under net/ to
whatever extent is possible...
Thanks,
PaulAttachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
