On Apr 20, 2009, at 1:31 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
On Apr 20, 2009, at 11:26 AM, Becky Bruce wrote:+static int ppc_swiotlb_bus_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, + unsigned long action, void *data) +{ + struct device *dev = data; + + /* We are only intereted in device addition */ + if (action != BUS_NOTIFY_ADD_DEVICE) + return 0; + + if (dma_get_mask(dev) < DMA_BIT_MASK(36)) + set_dma_ops(dev, &swiotlb_dma_ops); + + return NOTIFY_DONE; +} + +static struct notifier_block ppc_swiotlb_plat_bus_notifier = { + .notifier_call = ppc_swiotlb_bus_notify, + .priority = 0, +}; + +static struct notifier_block ppc_swiotlb_of_bus_notifier = { + .notifier_call = ppc_swiotlb_bus_notify, + .priority = 0, +}; + +static int __init setup_bus_notifier(void) +{ + bus_register_notifier(&platform_bus_type, + &ppc_swiotlb_plat_bus_notifier); + bus_register_notifier(&of_platform_bus_type, + &ppc_swiotlb_of_bus_notifier); + + return 0; +}I think we should move all this into the platform code for now. I don't like having to duplicate it but that gives us the proper flexibility for now.
Ugh, gross. I'd like to think about this some more. -B _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
