Re: USB transfer_buffer allocations on 64bit systems
From: Daniel Mack
Date: Wed Apr 07 2010 - 12:16:14 EST
On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 11:55:19AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Apr 2010, Greg KH wrote:
> > Alan, any objection to just using usb_buffer_alloc() for every driver?
> > Or is that too much overhead?
> I don't know what the overhead is. But usb_buffer_alloc() requires the
> caller to keep track of the buffer's DMA address, so it's not a simple
> plug-in replacement. In addition, the consistent memory that
> usb_buffer_alloc() provides is a scarce resource on some platforms.
> Writing new functions is the way to go.
Ok, I'll write some dummies for usb_malloc() and usb_zalloc() which
will just call kmalloc() with GFP_DMA32 for now. And while at it,
usb_alloc_buffer() will be renamed to usb_alloc_consistent(). Then I'll
try to clean up all existing drivers to use this new interface and
follow the changes.
In a next step, we should fine-tune when GFP_DMA32 is really needed.
And I'll leave all occurances of usb_alloc_consistent() as they are now.
Does that sound ok?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/