Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 22:01:07 -0600 From: Scott Long <scott_long@btc.adaptec.com> To: Nate Lawson <nate@root.org> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/alpha/alpha busdma_machdep.csrc/sys/alpha/include bus.h src/sys/amd64/amd64 busdma_machdep.c src/sys/amd64/include bus_dma.h src/sys/i386/i386 busdma_machdep Message-ID: <3ED2E303.7070304@btc.adaptec.com> In-Reply-To: <20030526201453.V5016@root.org> References: <20030526040103.EF60537B401@hub.freebsd.org> <20030526201453.V5016@root.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Nate Lawson wrote: > On Sun, 25 May 2003, Scott Long wrote: > >> Modified files: >> sys/alpha/alpha busdma_machdep.c >> sys/alpha/include bus.h >> sys/amd64/amd64 busdma_machdep.c >> sys/amd64/include bus_dma.h >> sys/i386/i386 busdma_machdep.c >> sys/i386/include bus_dma.h >> sys/sparc64/include bus.h iommuvar.h >> sys/sparc64/pci psycho.c >> sys/sparc64/sbus sbus.c >> sys/sparc64/sparc64 iommu.c >> Log: >> De-orbit bus_dmamem_alloc_size(). It's a hack and was never used anyways. >> No need for it to pollute the 5.x API any further. >> >> Approved by: re (bmah) > > > Do you plan to address this in the future? I believe it was useful for a > few drivers. I seem to recall you mentioning a more general approach for > the future. > > -Nate The better approach is to have bus_dmamap_load() respect the maxsegs field of the tag and coelesce the segments by whatever means it has available to it (bcopy, GART, etc). Note the the bus_dmamem_alloc_size stuff went into the tree in Jan but was never once used. Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3ED2E303.7070304>