On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 12:35:07AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:Jon Mason wrote:>From Andi Kleen's comments on the original Calgary patch, moveEven though BUG_ON() includes unlikely(), this introduces additional tests in very hot paths.
valid_dma_direction into the calling functions.
Signed-off-by: Muli Ben-Yehuda <muli@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx>
Are they really very hot? I mean if you're calling the DMA API, you're
about to frob the hardware or have already frobbed it - does this
check really matter?
_Why_ do we need this at all?
It was helpful for us during the dma-ops work and Calgary bringup and
Andi requested that we move it from Calgary to common code. I think
we're fine with dropping it if that's the consensus, but it did catch
a few bugs early on and the cost is tiny.