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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTimtQrmrW-pNWX=0J9GMsGrS-5-LZKkxdHDSuSxW@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 10 Aug 2010 00:45:17 +0200
From:	Linus Walleij <linus.ml.walleij@...il.com>
To:	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>
Cc:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] ARM i.MX dma: implement wrapper for dma functions

2010/8/9 Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>:

> Currently there is only one i.MX DMA implementation in the tree,
> the one for i.MX1/21/27. The SDMA support for i.MX25/31/35/51 can
> be implemented similarly. This wrapper for the DMA is implemented
> so that drivers do not have to care about the implementation
> present and don't have to #ifdef DMA support
>
> Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>
> (...)
> +struct imx_dma_operations {
> +       int (*config_channel)(int channel, struct imx_dma_config *cfg);
> +       int (*setup_single)(int channel, dma_addr_t mem, int dma_length,
> +               unsigned int dmamode);
> +       int (*setup_sg)(int channel, struct scatterlist *sg,
> +                       unsigned int sgcount, unsigned int dma_length,
> +                       unsigned int dmamode);
> +       void (*enable)(int channel);
> +       void (*disable)(int channel);
> +       int (*request)(enum imx_dma_prio);
> +       void (*free)(int channel);
> +       int num_channels;
> +};

This is just getting *so* close to the drivers/dma dmaengine API.

We decided to use the damengine for all our DMA drivers and we
haven't regretted one bit.

There has been some noise about too many drivers stacking up
below arch/arm instead of going to the apropriate subsystem, can't
you atleast contemplate using the dmaengine and help us improve
that subsystem?

I sent some patches to Dan which essentially is a single-buffer
(non-sglist) API, which is all I see missing to fit this need.

Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ