Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>Hi !
>
>We used to have the following patch in the PPC tree for ages, could
>someone confirm if it makes sense or not, and if yes, can the maintainer
>send it to Marcelo ?
>
It does not make sense for struct ed (it just makes sense for td).
- Roman
>
>Regards,
>Ben.
>
>
>diff -uNr --exclude-from=diff_exclude linux-2.4.18-pre2/drivers/usb/usb-
>ohci.h linux-2.4.18-pre2.ppc/drivers/usb/usb-ohci.h
>--- linux-2.4.18-pre2/drivers/usb/usb-ohci.h Wed Oct 24 17:26:12 2001
>+++ linux-2.4.18-pre2.ppc/drivers/usb/usb-ohci.h Tue Jan 8 10:38:03 2002
>@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@
>
> dma_addr_t dma;
> __u32 unused[3];
>-} __attribute((aligned(16)));
>+} __attribute((aligned(32)));
> typedef struct ed ed_t;
>
>
>@@ -567,7 +567,7 @@
> return -ENOMEM;
> ohci->dev_cache = pci_pool_create ("ohci_dev", ohci->ohci_dev,
> sizeof (struct ohci_device),
>- 16 /* byte alignment */,
>+ 32 /* byte alignment */,
> 0 /* no page-crossing issues */,
> GFP_KERNEL | OHCI_MEM_FLAGS);
> if (!ohci->dev_cache)
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
>
>
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
