Thanks for the reply.
Is there any problem if we use the below API's in
functionality wise, especially in r4k.c i dont see any
difference between the implementation of these APIs.
Can we apply the 2.6.24 patch to kill these APIs on
2.6.18 kernel? In this case what APIs i can use for
writeback, invalidation or both?
I couldn't find any info. related to the above API in
DMA-API.txt. Could you please give some pointers on
the usage/working of these APIs.
--- Ralf Baechle <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 10:04:32AM +0100, veerasena
> reddy wrote:
> > I have ported Linux-2.6.18 kernel on MIPS24KE
> > processor. I am using write back cache policy.
> > Could you please guide me under what cases the
> > cache API's are being used:
> > - dma_cache_wback_inv() : Could you explain what
> > exactly this function does
> > - dma_cache_wback() : This function write back the
> > cache data to memory
> > - dma_cache_inv : This function invalidate the
> > tags. so subsequent access will fetch from memory.
> > Once I looked the above function definitions in
> > linux-2.6.18/arch/mips/mm/c-r4k.c.
> > All these function's implemetation are same except
> > bc_wbak_inv() is called in both
> > and dma_cache_wback(), where as bc_inv() is called
> > case of dma_cache_inv.
> > Also, bc_inv()/bc_wbak_inv are define as null
> > implementation for R4000.
> > That means all three functions are doing same
> > functionality in case of R4000.
> > What are the difference between these three
> > Under what cases these functions are used.
> An internal only interface to be used with I/O cache
> > Please guide me if you have any links which will
> > explain these API's.
> Easy answer, don't use them, for 2.6.24 I've queued
> a patch to kill this
> API. Documentation/DMA-API.txt documents how to
> properly deal with I/O
> coherency in Linux.
Save all your chat conversations. Find them online at