On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 06:16:30PM -0700, Ira Weiny wrote: > > That might require to support > > kmap_atomic_prot everywhere first, which sounds like a really good > > idea anyway, and would avoid the need for strange workaround in drm. > > Having a kmap_atomic_prot() seems like a good idea. But I'm not exactly sure > why CONFIG_x86 is being called out specifically in the DRM code? Probably because it only existed on x86 back then. And drm has a tendency of working around core problems with hacks instead of doing the fairly easy fixups.
