search for: dma_noop_mapping_error

Displaying 17 results from an estimated 17 matches for "dma_noop_mapping_error".

2015 Nov 03
0
[PATCH 1/3] dma: Provide simple noop dma ops
...ction dir, struct dma_attrs *attrs) +{ + int i; + struct scatterlist *sg; + + for_each_sg(sgl, sg, nents, i) { + void *va; + + BUG_ON(!sg_page(sg)); + va = sg_virt(sg); + sg_dma_address(sg) = (dma_addr_t)virt_to_phys(va); + sg_dma_len(sg) = sg->length; + } + + return nents; +} + +static int dma_noop_mapping_error(struct device *dev, dma_addr_t dma_addr) +{ + return 0; +} + +static int dma_noop_supported(struct device *dev, u64 mask) +{ + return 1; +} + +struct dma_map_ops dma_noop_ops = { + .alloc = dma_noop_alloc, + .free = dma_noop_free, + .map_page = dma_noop_map_page, + .map_sg = dma_noop_map_sg,...
2015 Oct 30
0
[PATCH 1/3] Provide simple noop dma ops
...ction dir, struct dma_attrs *attrs) +{ + int i; + struct scatterlist *sg; + + for_each_sg(sgl, sg, nents, i) { + void *va; + + BUG_ON(!sg_page(sg)); + va = sg_virt(sg); + sg_dma_address(sg) = (dma_addr_t)virt_to_phys(va); + sg_dma_len(sg) = sg->length; + } + + return nents; +} + +static int dma_noop_mapping_error(struct device *dev, dma_addr_t dma_addr) +{ + return 0; +} + +static int dma_noop_supported(struct device *dev, u64 mask) +{ + return 1; +} + +struct dma_map_ops dma_noop_ops = { + .alloc = dma_noop_alloc, + .free = dma_noop_free, + .map_page = dma_noop_map_page, + .map_sg = dma_noop_map_sg,...
2015 Nov 05
0
[GIT PULL v4 1/3] dma: Provide simple noop dma ops
...ction dir, struct dma_attrs *attrs) +{ + int i; + struct scatterlist *sg; + + for_each_sg(sgl, sg, nents, i) { + void *va; + + BUG_ON(!sg_page(sg)); + va = sg_virt(sg); + sg_dma_address(sg) = (dma_addr_t)virt_to_phys(va); + sg_dma_len(sg) = sg->length; + } + + return nents; +} + +static int dma_noop_mapping_error(struct device *dev, dma_addr_t dma_addr) +{ + return 0; +} + +static int dma_noop_supported(struct device *dev, u64 mask) +{ + return 1; +} + +struct dma_map_ops dma_noop_ops = { + .alloc = dma_noop_alloc, + .free = dma_noop_free, + .map_page = dma_noop_map_page, + .map_sg = dma_noop_map_sg,...
2015 Nov 05
5
[GIT PULL v4 0/3] dma and virtio prep patches
Andy, to make it obvious which version is the latest, here is a branch The following changes since commit 6a13feb9c82803e2b815eca72fa7a9f5561d7861: Linux 4.3 (2015-11-01 16:05:25 -0800) are available in the git repository at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/borntraeger/linux.git dma for you to fetch changes up to fc7f9754db6ce0c12281da4055281f731d36bdee: s390/dma: Allow
2015 Nov 05
5
[GIT PULL v4 0/3] dma and virtio prep patches
Andy, to make it obvious which version is the latest, here is a branch The following changes since commit 6a13feb9c82803e2b815eca72fa7a9f5561d7861: Linux 4.3 (2015-11-01 16:05:25 -0800) are available in the git repository at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/borntraeger/linux.git dma for you to fetch changes up to fc7f9754db6ce0c12281da4055281f731d36bdee: s390/dma: Allow
2015 Nov 03
5
[PATCHv3 0/3] dma ops and virtio
Andy, this is the next and hopefully last version. Seems to work fine when replacing the previous patches in your tree. I have some reviews/acks for patch 2 and 3. patch 1 still needs one ack. Can you replace the patches in your tree and carry them along with your changes? old introduction: ----- There are some attempts to unify the dma ops (Christoph) as well as some attempts to make virtio use
2015 Nov 03
5
[PATCHv3 0/3] dma ops and virtio
Andy, this is the next and hopefully last version. Seems to work fine when replacing the previous patches in your tree. I have some reviews/acks for patch 2 and 3. patch 1 still needs one ack. Can you replace the patches in your tree and carry them along with your changes? old introduction: ----- There are some attempts to unify the dma ops (Christoph) as well as some attempts to make virtio use
2015 Oct 30
8
[PATCHv2 0/3] dma ops and virtio
here is the 2nd version of providing an DMA API for s390. There are some attempts to unify the dma ops (Christoph) as well as some attempts to make virtio use the dma API (Andy). At kernel summit we concluded that we want to use the same code on all platforms, whereever possible, so having a dummy dma_op might be the easiest solution to keep virtio-ccw as similar as possible to
2015 Oct 30
8
[PATCHv2 0/3] dma ops and virtio
here is the 2nd version of providing an DMA API for s390. There are some attempts to unify the dma ops (Christoph) as well as some attempts to make virtio use the dma API (Andy). At kernel summit we concluded that we want to use the same code on all platforms, whereever possible, so having a dummy dma_op might be the easiest solution to keep virtio-ccw as similar as possible to
2015 Oct 30
0
[PATCH 2/3] alpha: use common noop dma ops
...lpha_noop_alloc_coherent, - .free = alpha_noop_free_coherent, - .map_page = alpha_noop_map_page, - .map_sg = alpha_noop_map_sg, - .mapping_error = alpha_noop_mapping_error, + .free = dma_noop_free_coherent, + .map_page = dma_noop_map_page, + .map_sg = dma_noop_map_sg, + .mapping_error = dma_noop_mapping_error, .dma_supported = alpha_noop_supported, }; -- 2.4.3
2015 Nov 05
0
[GIT PULL v4 2/3] alpha/dma: use common noop dma ops
...lpha_noop_alloc_coherent, - .free = alpha_noop_free_coherent, - .map_page = alpha_noop_map_page, - .map_sg = alpha_noop_map_sg, - .mapping_error = alpha_noop_mapping_error, + .free = dma_noop_free_coherent, + .map_page = dma_noop_map_page, + .map_sg = dma_noop_map_sg, + .mapping_error = dma_noop_mapping_error, .dma_supported = alpha_noop_supported, }; -- 2.4.3
2016 Jan 29
18
[PATCH v5 00/10] virtio DMA API, yet again
This switches virtio to use the DMA API on Xen and if requested by module option. This fixes virtio on Xen, and it should break anything because it's off by default on everything except Xen PV on x86. To the Xen people: is this okay? If it doesn't work on other Xen variants (PVH? HVM?), can you submit follow-up patches to fix it? To everyone else: we've waffled on this for way too
2016 Jan 29
18
[PATCH v5 00/10] virtio DMA API, yet again
This switches virtio to use the DMA API on Xen and if requested by module option. This fixes virtio on Xen, and it should break anything because it's off by default on everything except Xen PV on x86. To the Xen people: is this okay? If it doesn't work on other Xen variants (PVH? HVM?), can you submit follow-up patches to fix it? To everyone else: we've waffled on this for way too
2016 Feb 01
14
[PATCH v6 0/9] virtio DMA API, yet again
This switches virtio to use the DMA API on Xen and if requested by module option. This fixes virtio on Xen, and it should break anything because it's off by default on everything except Xen PV on x86. To the Xen people: is this okay? If it doesn't work on other Xen variants (PVH? HVM?), can you submit follow-up patches to fix it? To everyone else: we've waffled on this for way too
2016 Feb 01
14
[PATCH v6 0/9] virtio DMA API, yet again
This switches virtio to use the DMA API on Xen and if requested by module option. This fixes virtio on Xen, and it should break anything because it's off by default on everything except Xen PV on x86. To the Xen people: is this okay? If it doesn't work on other Xen variants (PVH? HVM?), can you submit follow-up patches to fix it? To everyone else: we've waffled on this for way too
2016 Feb 03
14
[PATCH v7 0/9] virtio DMA API, yet again
This switches virtio to use the DMA API on Xen and if requested by module option. This fixes virtio on Xen, and it should break anything because it's off by default on everything except Xen PV on x86. To the Xen people: is this okay? If it doesn't work on other Xen variants (PVH? HVM?), can you submit follow-up patches to fix it? To everyone else: we've waffled on this for way too
2016 Feb 03
14
[PATCH v7 0/9] virtio DMA API, yet again
This switches virtio to use the DMA API on Xen and if requested by module option. This fixes virtio on Xen, and it should break anything because it's off by default on everything except Xen PV on x86. To the Xen people: is this okay? If it doesn't work on other Xen variants (PVH? HVM?), can you submit follow-up patches to fix it? To everyone else: we've waffled on this for way too