[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080919132544.533ab7d0@hskinnemo-gx745.norway.atmel.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 13:25:44 +0200
From: Haavard Skinnemoen <haavard.skinnemoen@...el.com>
To: "Dan Williams" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc: "Timur Tabi" <timur@...escale.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: dmaengine.c: question about device_alloc_chan_resources
"Dan Williams" <dan.j.williams@...el.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 7:45 AM, Haavard Skinnemoen
> <haavard.skinnemoen@...el.com> wrote:
> > Timur Tabi <timur@...escale.com> wrote:
> >> Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> >>
> >> > Wouldn't it be better if the dmaengine layer made sure it didn't pass
> >> > the same channel several times to a client?
> >>
> >> Wouldn't that require it to keep track of which clients have already seen which
> >> channels? It might make more sense, but it's probably easier the current way.
> >
> > I guess so. What would be even more simple is to simply prevent other
> > clients from taking a channel once someone has acked it, which would be
> > perfect for my purposes, but perhaps not everyone else's...
>
> Does not seem too bad to have something like a DMA_EXCL flag in
> dma_chan to tell the core not to show this channel to any other
> clients.
Yes, or maybe provide an interface for simply requesting a channel
without having to register any callbacks. With some drivers, the number
of required channels is fixed, and not using DMA just isn't an option.
A simple "get a channel which satisfies these constraints" interface
would simplify these drivers a lot.
Haavard
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists