[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4DC783A9.5060802@st.com>
Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 11:33:21 +0530
From: viresh kumar <viresh.kumar@...com>
To: "Koul, Vinod" <vinod.koul@...el.com>
Cc: "dan.j.williams@...el.com" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Armando VISCONTI <armando.visconti@...com>,
Shiraz HASHIM <shiraz.hashim@...com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"viresh.linux@...il.com" <viresh.linux@...il.com>,
"linux@....linux.org.uk" <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 3/5] dmaengine/dw_dmac: Divide one sg to many desc,
if sg len is greater than DWC_MAX_COUNT
On 05/09/2011 10:50 AM, Koul, Vinod wrote:
>> > @@ -695,9 +695,15 @@ dwc_prep_slave_sg(struct dma_chan *chan, struct scatterlist *sgl,
>> > reg = dws->tx_reg;
>> > for_each_sg(sgl, sg, sg_len, i) {
>> > struct dw_desc *desc;
>> > - u32 len;
>> > - u32 mem;
>> > + u32 len, dlen, mem;
>> >
>> > + mem = sg_phys(sg);
>> > + len = sg_dma_len(sg);
>> > + mem_width = 2;
> hardcoding mem_width doesn't make sense, you should take this from input
> params
Firstly, this change is not introduced in this patch, i have just rearranged this.
So, will send separate patch if this change is required.
Secondly, peripheral width is taken from chan->private. And by 2 for mem_width,
we meant word-by-word here. Shouldn't we always try word-by-word here?
How should we pass width for memory?
--
viresh
--
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