On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Alexandre Courbot
wrote:
> On 07/10/2014 09:58 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 05:25:57PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>>>
>>> page_to_phys() is not the correct way to obtain the DMA address of a
>>> buffer on a non-PCI system. Use the
On 07/11/2014 11:50 AM, Ben Skeggs wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Alexandre Courbot
> wrote:
>> On 07/10/2014 09:58 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 05:25:57PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
page_to_phys() is not the correct way to obtain the DMA
Am Freitag, den 11.07.2014, 11:57 +0900 schrieb Alexandre Courbot:
[...]
> >> Yeah, I am not familiar with i915 but it seems like we are on a similar
> >> boat
> >> here (excepted ARM is more constrained as to its memory mappings). The
> >> strategy in this series is, map buffers used by
On 07/10/2014 09:58 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 05:25:57PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>> page_to_phys() is not the correct way to obtain the DMA address of a
>> buffer on a non-PCI system. Use the DMA API functions for this, which
>> are portable and will allow us to
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:35:23AM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On 07/10/2014 09:58 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 05:25:57PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> >>page_to_phys() is not the correct way to obtain the DMA address of a
> >>buffer on a non-PCI system. Use the
On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 05:25:57PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> page_to_phys() is not the correct way to obtain the DMA address of a
> buffer on a non-PCI system. Use the DMA API functions for this, which
> are portable and will allow us to use other DMA API functions for
> buffer
