On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 12:52:26PM +0100, Hiroshi Doyu wrote: > Will Deacon <will.dea...@arm.com> wrote @ Tue, 25 Jun 2013 13:37:14 +0200: > ... > > > Do we need similar changes for map_sg case as well? They still passes '0' > > > as prot. > > > > Yes, we could use the same trick there (probably worth moving the logic into > > a helper function for translating dma_data_direction into IOMMU_* values). > > > > There are also iommu_map calls when allocating DMA buffers, but I think 0 is > > the right thing to pass there (i.e. no permission until pages have been > > explicitly mapped). Although, to be honest, I don't see why we need to map > > the buffer at all when we allocate it. > > Yes, I thought too. I have a patch for that as below. If you like, > I'll rebase and send for merge with the one which changes > dma-mapping.c.
Yes, please send the series and I'll take a look. Marek's already picked up my original patch, so it's better if you can base against a stable branch from him. Will _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
