On Mon, 2007-08-06 at 16:25 -0600, Robert Hancock wrote: > > Anyway. For now I will simply go with what 2.6.23-rc has and what > > 2.6.21 had: No dma_set_mask anywhere in the 1394 subsystem. We can > > revisit this whenever an actual need arises. > > Not sure this is a very good idea. This seems rather likely to fail on > x86_64 machines with >4GB of RAM for example..
Would it ? Isn't the default DMA mask for PCI devices set to 32 bits anyway ? In which case, swiotlb will take care of the matter. Cheers, Ben. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
