From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1763227AbYA3R0T@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1763227AbYA3R0T (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:26:19 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755153AbYA3R0L
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:26:11 -0500
Received: from accolon.hansenpartnership.com ([76.243.235.52]:53334 "EHLO
	accolon.hansenpartnership.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753324AbYA3R0K (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:26:10 -0500
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] dma/ia64: update ia64 machvecs
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
To: akepner@sgi.com
Cc: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
       Grant Grundler <grundler@parisc-linux.org>,
       Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>, Jes Sorensen <jes@sgi.com>,
       Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>,
       Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
       Muli Ben-Yehuda <muli@il.ibm.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <20080130055212.GT30022@sgi.com>
References: <20080130055212.GT30022@sgi.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:25:58 -0600
Message-Id: <1201713958.3292.27.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.3 (2.12.3-1.fc8) 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

In general, the patches look reasonable to me.  Just an observation:

On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 21:52 -0800, akepner@sgi.com wrote:
> diff --git a/include/linux/dma-attrs.h b/include/linux/dma-attrs.h
> index e69de29..31af292 100644
> --- a/include/linux/dma-attrs.h
> +++ b/include/linux/dma-attrs.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
> +#ifndef _DMA_ATTR_H
> +#define _DMA_ATTR_H
> +#ifdef ARCH_USES_DMA_ATTRS
> +
> +enum dma_attr {
> +       DMA_ATTR_BARRIER,
> +       DMA_ATTR_FOO,
> +       DMA_ATTR_GOO,
> +       DMA_ATTR_MAX,
> +};
> +


The attribute names (DMA_ATTR_...) are going to have to live somewhere
outside of the #ifdef ARCH_USES_DMA_ATTRS otherwise we'll get compile
failures of drivers using attributes on architectures that don't support
them.

Secondly, DMA_ATTR_BARRIER doesn't quite sound right.  What you're
actually doing is trying to prescribe strict ordering, so shouldn't this
be something like DMA_ATTR_STRICT_ORDERING (and perhaps with a
corresponding DMA_ATTR_RELAXED_ORDERING for the PCIe case).  also,
strike the DMA_ATTR_FOO and DMA_ATTR_GOO since they have no plausible
meaning.

James