adam@yggdrasil.com said:
> This makes me lean infinitesmally more toward a parameter to
> dma_alloc rather than a separate dma_alloc_not_necessarily_consistent
> function, because if there ever are other dma_alloc variations that we
> want to support, it is more likely that there may be overlap between
> the users of those features and then the number of different function
> calls would have to grow exponentially (or we might then talk about
> changing the API again, which is not the end of the world, but is
> certainly more difficult than not having to do so).
I think I like this.
how about dma_alloc to take two flags
DRIVER_SUPPORTS_CONSISTENT_ONLY
and
DRIVER_SUPPORTS_NON_CONSISTENT
The meaning of which are hopefully obvious this time
and dma_alloc_consistent to be equivalent to dma_alloc with
DRIVER_SUPPORTS_CONSISTENT_ONLY (and hence equivalent to pci_alloc_consistent)
James
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Dec 07 2002 - 22:00:28 EST