"Abdiel Janulgue" <abdiel.janulgue@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
[...]
+/// Inform the kernel about the device's DMA addressing capabilities. This will set the mask for
+/// both streaming and coherent APIs together.
+pub fn dma_set_mask_and_coherent(dev: &Device, mask: u64) -> i32 {
+ // SAFETY: device pointer is guaranteed as valid by invariant on `Device`.
+ unsafe { bindings::dma_set_mask_and_coherent(dev.as_raw(), mask) }
+}
+
+/// Same as `dma_set_mask_and_coherent`, but set the mask only for streaming mappings.
+pub fn dma_set_mask(dev: &Device, mask: u64) -> i32 {
+ // SAFETY: device pointer is guaranteed as valid by invariant on `Device`.
+ unsafe { bindings::dma_set_mask(dev.as_raw(), mask) }
+}
Sorry if it was asked before, I am late to the party. But would it make
sense to put these to functions on `Device` and make them take `&self`.
+
+/// Possible attributes associated with a DMA mapping.
+///
+/// They can be combined with the operators `|`, `&`, and `!`.
+///
+/// Values can be used from the [`attrs`] module.
+#[derive(Clone, Copy, PartialEq)]
+#[repr(transparent)]
+pub struct Attrs(u32);
+
+impl Attrs {
+ /// Get the raw representation of this attribute.
+ pub(crate) fn as_raw(self) -> crate::ffi::c_ulong {
+ self.0 as _
+ }
+
+ /// Check whether `flags` is contained in `self`.
+ pub fn contains(self, flags: Attrs) -> bool {
+ (self & flags) == flags
+ }
+}
+
+impl core::ops::BitOr for Attrs {
+ type Output = Self;
+ fn bitor(self, rhs: Self) -> Self::Output {
+ Self(self.0 | rhs.0)
+ }
+}
+
+impl core::ops::BitAnd for Attrs {
+ type Output = Self;
+ fn bitand(self, rhs: Self) -> Self::Output {
+ Self(self.0 & rhs.0)
+ }
+}
+
+impl core::ops::Not for Attrs {
+ type Output = Self;
+ fn not(self) -> Self::Output {
+ Self(!self.0)
+ }
+}
+
+/// DMA mapping attrributes.
Typo in attributes.
Best regards,
Andreas Hindborg