On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 12:11:27 -0800 Ralph Campbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'd have picked this up if it had been in git-infiniband for even a couple > > of days. I'm assuming this all got slammed into mainline because of the > > merge window thing. > > > > I cannot find these patches on the kernel mailing list. I cannot find the > > pull request anywhere. > > > > > +static inline u64 ib_dma_map_single(struct ib_device *dev, > > > + void *cpu_addr, size_t size, > > > + enum dma_data_direction direction) > > > > no, dma_map_single() returns a dma_addr_t. > > ib_dma_map_single() allows the ib_ipath device driver to interpose > on IOMMU allocations and not do them by returning the kernel > virtual address as the "DMA address". I started with dma_addr_t > but it was pointed out to me that sparc64 defines dma_addr_t > as u32. This would cause addresses to be truncated. > Also, I chose u64 because the return value from ib_dma_*() is > stored in the ib_sge.addr field which is u64. > > My preference would be to change the offending uses of dma_addr_t > to u64. Do you have a better solution? We should be able to use dma_addr_t for this? Is it not the case that the values we're dealing with here _are_ DMA addresses? I think a more complete description of the problem we're trying to solve here would help. I'm not sure what the problem is with sparc64 - perhaps its dma_addr_t really is a "cookie" and isn't a physical bus address? But you want a value which is really a physical bus address? Dunno. Perhaps dma64_addr_t can be used here. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
