On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 11:48:49PM -0400, Allen Briggs wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 06:53:32PM -0700, cgd@broadcom.com wrote:
> > well, what do you mean "some device that isn't coherent?"
> 
> I don't think it's relevant because I don't have an actual machine
> in mind.  Just a hypothetical case that would actually be pretty
> brain-dead.  (Not to say that brain-dead things don't get to market,
> mind you...)
> 
> OK.  So I think that in summary, it might make the most sense to:
> 
> 	* Make BUS_DMA_COHERENT required for proper operation by
> 	  changing the description in bus_dmamem_map()
> 
[...]
> 	* Add BUS_DMA_COHERENT to bus_dmamap_load()

Does this mean we can finally get rid of that BUS_DMA_STREAMING 
flag?

Eduardo