[PATCH] bounce: call flush_dcache_page after bounce_copy_vec

[Brad Figg]

On 09/13/2010 05:30 AM, Stefan Bader wrote:
> On 09/13/2010 07:49 AM, Bryan Wu wrote:
>> From: Gary King<gking at nvidia.com>
>>
>> the bounced page needs to be flushed after data is copied into it,
>> to ensure that architecture implementations can synchronize
>> instruction and data caches if necessary.
>>
>> This patch was posted at armlinux mail list and was asked by Andrew
>> Morton and Jens Axboe. We tried this patch and found is fixed memtester
>> issue.
>> (http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2010-September/025373.html)
>>
> Maybe I could guess where this patch ought to go (given that Leann is on the cc)
> but is this ti-omap and by that should go to Lucid to be pulled into Maverick?
>
> -Stefan
>> BugLink: http://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/633227
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Gary King<gking at nvidia.com>
>> Tested-by: Ricardo Salveti de Araujo<ricardo.salveti at canonical.com>
>> Tested-by: Sebastien Jan<s-jan at ti.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Bryan Wu<bryan.wu at canonical.com>
>> ---
>>   mm/bounce.c |    2 +-
>>   1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/bounce.c b/mm/bounce.c
>> index 13b6dad..1481de6 100644
>> --- a/mm/bounce.c
>> +++ b/mm/bounce.c
>> @@ -116,8 +116,8 @@ static void copy_to_high_bio_irq(struct bio *to, struct bio *from)
>>   		 */
>>   		vfrom = page_address(fromvec->bv_page) + tovec->bv_offset;
>>
>> -		flush_dcache_page(tovec->bv_page);
>>   		bounce_copy_vec(tovec, vfrom);
>> +		flush_dcache_page(tovec->bv_page);
>>   	}
>>   }
>>
>
>

Bryan,

Just in case Stefan's email wasn't explicit enough. In the future the Subject of an
email with a pull request / patch should explicitly state which release your patch
is targeted at. For example this one should have read:

[Maverick][ti-omap4][Patch 1/1] bounce: call flush_dcache_page after bounce_copy_vec

Brad
-- 
Brad Figg brad.figg at canonical.com http://www.canonical.com