On Thu, Oct 25 2007, Hugh Dickins wrote:
quoted text
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > > Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
> > > ---
> > > Whether this is a complete patch, suitable for all architectures,
> > > I'm not sure: it builds, boots and runs correctly on the x86_32 box
> > > in question, but you'll be a lot wiser than me about using dma_addr_t
> > > for everyone.  (Seems a bit of a shame to include <asm/types.h> here,
> > > when I think all arches already get to include it one way or another,
> > > typically via asm/scatterlist.h; but I guess it's safest to repeat
> > > it.)
> > 
> > there is a problem with this... sg_phys doesn't return an actual *dma*
> > address.... at least not an address you can give to the device.
> > Using dma_addr_t is thus a bit misleading.....
> 
> True.  Perhaps sg_phys() should use its own sg_phys_addr_t, defined
> or typedefed to be the same as dma_addr_t.  But would this inline
> function then be the only place in the tree which uses that type?
> If so, then it'd probably be better just to let sg_phys() carry on
> using dma_addr_t, but insert a comment there to make your point.
> 
> But I'll leave it to Jens to fix up the patch appropriately: for
> all I know, there might be arches on which using dma_addr_t there
> actually does the wrong thing - I don't think so, but I know too
> little about it.

dma_addr_t would seem OK to me, given the lack of phys_addr_t.

-- 
Jens Axboe

-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/