Re: [patch 2.6.13] swiotlb: add swiotlb_sync_single_range_for_{cpu,device}
From: John W. Linville (linville_at_tuxdriver.com)
Date: 08/30/05
- Previous message: Yani Ioannou: "Re: [PATCH] IPMI: driver model and sysfs support"
- In reply to: Luck, Tony: "RE: [patch 2.6.13] swiotlb: add swiotlb_sync_single_range_for_{cpu,device}"
- Next in thread: John W. Linville: "[rfc patch] swiotlb: consolidate swiotlb_sync_single_* implementations"
- Reply: John W. Linville: "[rfc patch] swiotlb: consolidate swiotlb_sync_single_* implementations"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 14:09:14 -0400 To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 11:03:35AM -0700, Luck, Tony wrote:
>
> >+swiotlb_sync_single_range_for_cpu(struct device *hwdev,
> >+swiotlb_sync_single_range_for_device(struct device *hwdev,
>
> Huh? These look identical ... same args, same code, just a
> different name.
Have you looked at the implementations for swiotlb_sync_single_for_cpu
and swiotlb_sync_single_for_device? Those are already identical.
I'm just following the existing style/practice in that file. I could
do an additional patch to rectify the replication in those functions
if you'd like?
Who is responsible for the swiotlb code?
John
-- John W. Linville linville@tuxdriver.com - 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/
- Previous message: Yani Ioannou: "Re: [PATCH] IPMI: driver model and sysfs support"
- In reply to: Luck, Tony: "RE: [patch 2.6.13] swiotlb: add swiotlb_sync_single_range_for_{cpu,device}"
- Next in thread: John W. Linville: "[rfc patch] swiotlb: consolidate swiotlb_sync_single_* implementations"
- Reply: John W. Linville: "[rfc patch] swiotlb: consolidate swiotlb_sync_single_* implementations"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|