Re: [patch] Re: Making reclaim_buffers OS-independent

[Dave Airlie <airlied@li...>]

> A patch is attached. It changes both linux/linux-2.6 and linux-core. I
> tested that it compiles (linux-2.6 and linux-core) and loads all module=
s
> (except radeon, which failed because I don't have the necessary i2c bit=
s
> in my kernel). Any objections to applying this?
>

Looks good to me apply away...

Dave.

> Regards,
>   Felix
>
> Am Sa, den 30.10.2004 schrieb Felix K=FChling um 23:56:
> > Currenly in linux-core the driver callback reclaim_buffers is called
> > with a single argument "filp". In reclaim_buffers you need OS-specifi=
c
> > knowledge to extract the device pointer from the filp. In the BSD DRM
> > reclaim_buffers takes two arguments, "dev" and "filp". Could we chang=
e
> > the linux version to use the same API? This would allow implementing =
an
> > OS-agnostic reclaim_buffers function in a driver.
> >
> > Regards,
> >   Felix
>

--=20
David Airlie, Software Engineer
http://www.skynet.ie/~airlied / airlied at skynet.ie
pam_smb / Linux DECstation / Linux VAX / ILUG person

Making reclaim_buffers OS-independent

[Felix <fxkuehl@gm...>]

Currenly in linux-core the driver callback reclaim_buffers is called
with a single argument "filp". In reclaim_buffers you need OS-specific
knowledge to extract the device pointer from the filp. In the BSD DRM
reclaim_buffers takes two arguments, "dev" and "filp". Could we change
the linux version to use the same API? This would allow implementing an
OS-agnostic reclaim_buffers function in a driver.

Regards,
  Felix

--=20
| Felix K=FChling <fxkuehl@...>                     http://fxk.de.vu |
| PGP Fingerprint: 6A3C 9566 5B30 DDED 73C3  B152 151C 5CC1 D888 E595 |

[patch] Re: Making reclaim_buffers OS-independent

[Felix <fxkuehl@gm...>]

A patch is attached. It changes both linux/linux-2.6 and linux-core. I
tested that it compiles (linux-2.6 and linux-core) and loads all modules
(except radeon, which failed because I don't have the necessary i2c bits
in my kernel). Any objections to applying this?

Regards,
  Felix

Am Sa, den 30.10.2004 schrieb Felix K=FChling um 23:56:
> Currenly in linux-core the driver callback reclaim_buffers is called
> with a single argument "filp". In reclaim_buffers you need OS-specific
> knowledge to extract the device pointer from the filp. In the BSD DRM
> reclaim_buffers takes two arguments, "dev" and "filp". Could we change
> the linux version to use the same API? This would allow implementing an
> OS-agnostic reclaim_buffers function in a driver.
>=20
> Regards,
>   Felix
--=20
| Felix K=FChling <fxkuehl@...>                     http://fxk.de.vu |
| PGP Fingerprint: 6A3C 9566 5B30 DDED 73C3  B152 151C 5CC1 D888 E595 |

Re: [patch] Re: Making reclaim_buffers OS-independent

[Dave Airlie <airlied@li...>]

> A patch is attached. It changes both linux/linux-2.6 and linux-core. I
> tested that it compiles (linux-2.6 and linux-core) and loads all module=
s
> (except radeon, which failed because I don't have the necessary i2c bit=
s
> in my kernel). Any objections to applying this?
>

Looks good to me apply away...

Dave.

> Regards,
>   Felix
>
> Am Sa, den 30.10.2004 schrieb Felix K=FChling um 23:56:
> > Currenly in linux-core the driver callback reclaim_buffers is called
> > with a single argument "filp". In reclaim_buffers you need OS-specifi=
c
> > knowledge to extract the device pointer from the filp. In the BSD DRM
> > reclaim_buffers takes two arguments, "dev" and "filp". Could we chang=
e
> > the linux version to use the same API? This would allow implementing =
an
> > OS-agnostic reclaim_buffers function in a driver.
> >
> > Regards,
> >   Felix
>

--=20
David Airlie, Software Engineer
http://www.skynet.ie/~airlied / airlied at skynet.ie
pam_smb / Linux DECstation / Linux VAX / ILUG person