[PATCH v2] dma-mapping: treat dev->bus_dma_mask as a DMA limit

Christoph Hellwig hch at lst.de
Fri Nov 22 03:02:17 AEDT 2019


On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 03:55:39PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote:
> Hmm, there's no functional dependency though, is there? AFAICS it's 
> essentially just a context conflict. Is it worth simply dropping (or 
> postponing) the local renaming in __dma_direct_optimal_gfp_mask(), or 
> perhaps even cross-merging arm64/for-next/zone-dma into dma/for-next?

I would have no problem with pulling it in.  I'd kinda hate creating
the conflict, though.  So if the arm64 maintainers are fine with it
I'll pull it in, especially if I get an ACK from Robin.


More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list