From owner-freebsd-current Tue Jan 5 10:12:31 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA15073 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 10:12:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from feral-gw.feral.com (feral.com [192.67.166.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA15067 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 10:12:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mjacob@feral.com) Received: from localhost (mjacob@localhost) by feral-gw.feral.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA21494; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 10:11:34 -0800 Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 10:11:34 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Jacob X-Sender: mjacob@feral-gw Reply-To: mjacob@feral.com To: Doug Rabson cc: Garrett Wollman , Warner Losh , Bill Paul , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: bus_space_foo and bus_dmamap_foo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > > > Sounds like the Solaris DKI/DDI. Will you be making the bus_space handles > > hierarchical and bidirectional? That is, you can do bus_space_XXX for > > a CPU's access to i/o or memory space on a PCI device, but can you also > > see about a PCI device's view of memory (or another PCI device) such that > > dma handles are managed similarily? > > I'm not sure that this fits with the existing bus_dma apis which we have > taken from NetBSD. I wasn't planning to change that api much if at all. No, it doesn't fit with the existing NetBSD model. > It does make sense for the two to be at least similar though. To quote Eric Allman, "Well, *I* would certainly think so". -matt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message