On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 4:16 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
[off-list ref] wrote:

On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 03:04:07PM +0100, Tomasz Fujak wrote:

quoted

In other words, should we take your response as yet another NAK?
Or would you try harder and at least point us to some direction that
would not doom the effort from the very beginning.

What the fsck do you think I've been doing? ?This is NOT THE FIRST time
I've raised this issue. ?I gave up raising it after the first couple
of attempts because I wasn't being listened to.

You say about _me_ not being very helpful. ?How about the CMA proponents
start taking the issue I've raised seriously, and try to work out how
to solve it? ?And how about blaming them for the months of wasted time
on this issue _because_ _they_ have chosen to ignore it?

I've also raised the issue for ARM. However, I don't see what is the
big problem.

A generic solution (that I think I already proposed) would be to
reserve a chunk of memory for the CMA that can be removed from the
normally mapped kernel memory through memblock at boot time. The size
of this memory region would be configurable through kconfig. Then, the
CMA would have a "dma" flag or something, and take chunks out of it
until there's no more, and then return errors. That would work for
ARM.

Cheers.

-- 
Felipe Contreras