Re: [PATCH] DMA: Correct invalid assumptions in the Kconfig text

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Haavard Skinnemoen
Date: Saturday, October 27, 2007 - 6:58 am

On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 10:02:24 -0700
"Dan Williams" <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote:

Yeah, it's a pretty serious bug if the DMA engine flags an error. But
wouldn't it be better to BUG() in the context of the caller? That way,
you won't necessarily bring down the whole system.


It's probably a good idea to dump the descriptors at some point. I
don't think the client has many options to deal with such failures
other than reset something or kill something, but if the client gets
notified, it at least has some chance of recovering.

Håvard
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH] DMA: Correct invalid assumptions in the Kconfig text, Haavard Skinnemoen, (Wed Oct 24, 2:38 am)
Re: [PATCH] DMA: Correct invalid assumptions in the Kconfi ..., Haavard Skinnemoen, (Wed Oct 24, 11:16 am)
Re: [PATCH] DMA: Correct invalid assumptions in the Kconfi ..., Haavard Skinnemoen, (Thu Oct 25, 2:32 am)
Re: [PATCH] DMA: Correct invalid assumptions in the Kconfi ..., Haavard Skinnemoen, (Sat Oct 27, 6:58 am)
Re: [PATCH] DMA: Correct invalid assumptions in the Kconfi ..., Haavard Skinnemoen, (Sat Oct 27, 9:07 am)