Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 19:12:30 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org> To: Thomas Moestl <tmoestl@gmx.net> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Please review: changes to MI bus code for sparc64 Message-ID: <200112180212.fBI2CUM81074@harmony.village.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 13 Dec 2001 21:15:44 %2B0100." <20011213211544.A4747@crow.dom2ip.de> References: <20011213211544.A4747@crow.dom2ip.de> <20011213192033.A871@crow.dom2ip.de> <200112131901.fBDJ1hl02003@mass.dis.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20011213211544.A4747@crow.dom2ip.de> Thomas Moestl writes: : I'm not sure how this is meant. As I wrote, I am using it to manage virtual : DVMA memory, so I need to be able to allocate resources with given : alignment and boundary (to implement the busdma interface). Specifying : an alignment is already supported. The only method to enforce a : boundary at a higher level I could think of would be to try to adjust : the allocation, which would be a gross hack. I don't understand the difference between boundary and alignment. The resource manager already supports specifying an alignment in the flags argument. I know, I added it :-). Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200112180212.fBI2CUM81074>