linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv3 2/4] dmaengine: dw_dmac: move to generic DMA binding

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 16 Feb 2013 23:28:34 +0000
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc:	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>, Dan Williams <djbw@...com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 2/4] dmaengine: dw_dmac: move to generic DMA binding

On Saturday 16 February 2013, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

> > @@ -1836,6 +1825,12 @@ static int dw_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >
> >         dma_async_device_register(&dw->dma);
> >
> > +       if (pdev->dev.of_node)
> > +               err = of_dma_controller_register(pdev->dev.of_node,
> > +                                                dw_dma_xlate, dw);
> > +       if (err && err != -ENODEV)
> > +               dev_err(&pdev->dev, "could not register of_dma_controller\n");
> 
> I believe we may make it as
>  if (...of_node) {
>   err = ...register();
>   if (err...)
>     dev_err();
>  }

I thing the two are equivalent because we only get to the first if()
when err is 0. However, I agree that your version is a bit clearer,
so I'll change it.

> > --- a/drivers/dma/dw_dmac_regs.h
> > +++ b/drivers/dma/dw_dmac_regs.h
> 
> > @@ -211,9 +212,15 @@ struct dw_dma_chan {
> >         /* hardware configuration */
> >         unsigned int            block_size;
> >         bool                    nollp;
> > +       unsigned int            request_line;
> > +       struct dw_dma_slave     slave;
> > +
> 
> Do we really need an extra empty line here?

No, that was an accident.

> >         /* configuration passed via DMA_SLAVE_CONFIG */
> >         struct dma_slave_config dma_sconfig;
> > +
> > +       /* backlink to dw_dma */
> > +       struct dw_dma           *dw;
> 
> Seems it's not needed and came from rebase?

Probably. It certainly was not intentional.

	Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/