[PATCH 5/5] powerpc: Add 86xx support for SWIOTLB
michael at ellerman.id.au
Tue Apr 21 12:14:04 EST 2009
On Mon, 2009-04-20 at 12:58 -0500, Becky Bruce wrote:
> On Apr 20, 2009, at 12:00 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
> > On Apr 20, 2009, at 11:26 AM, Becky Bruce wrote:
> >> config PPC_NEED_DMA_SYNC_OPS
> >> def_bool y
> >> depends on (NOT_COHERENT_CACHE || SWIOTLB)
> >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/dma-swiotlb.c b/arch/powerpc/
> >> kernel/dma-swiotlb.c
> >> index 29a68e6..3065d03 100644
> >> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/dma-swiotlb.c
> >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/dma-swiotlb.c
> >> @@ -159,3 +159,5 @@ static int __init setup_bus_notifier(void)
> >> return 0;
> >> }
> >> +
> >> +machine_arch_initcall(mpc86xx_hpcn, setup_bus_notifier);
> > Hmm, not sure what we chatted about here, but I don't want to have
> > to add every board into this file to register the bus notifiers.
> We talked about this, and this was what we decided on - I don't really
> like the idea, either, but there's a lot of precedent for it. I'd
> like to do this differently, but I"m not sure what the solution is -
> we'd need to look into that more (or perhaps someone here will have
> some sage advice).
Give it a better name, export it, and call it from the board setup file?
Actually what depends on the board anyway? It's just the dma window
config in the pci_controller isn't it? So maybe you can always call the
notifier, and if the dma mask isn't 36 bits, and the controller has the
window configured then you use swiotlb?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
More information about the Linuxppc-dev