[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110728224038.GD829@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 23:40:38 +0100
From: Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk>
To: Jaswinder Singh <jaswinder.singh@...aro.org>
Cc: "Koul, Vinod" <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linus.walleij@...ricsson.com,
per.friden@...ricsson.com, wei.zhang@...escale.com,
ebony.zhu@...escale.com, iws@...o.caltech.edu,
s.hauer@...gutronix.de, maciej.sosnowski@...el.com,
saeed@...vell.com, shawn.guo@...escale.com, yur@...raft.com,
agust@...x.de, iwamatsu.nobuhiro@...esas.com,
per.forlin@...ricsson.com, jonas.aberg@...ricsson.com,
anemo@....ocn.ne.jp
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] DMAEngine: Let dmac drivers to set chan_id
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 11:24:12PM +0530, Jaswinder Singh wrote:
> On 28 July 2011 02:07, Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> On a serious note, my proposal, and the reply, shows the possibility
> >> of having :-
> >> a) Client drivers that are truly platform agnostic -- no platform_data
> >> poking for
> >> channel selection
> >
> > I really doubt that's even possible. Take this setup:
>
> I don't want to suggest anything wrong just because I didn't understand
> your h/w.
> I hope you will be kind enough to help me better understand your setup,
> so that I have a fair chance to present my proposal.
>
> A simple 'yes' or a 'no'(with clarification) is all I ask.
>
> >
> > MMCI ---> DMAC
> >
> > where the DMAC has 32 request signals, and 8 channels.
> The DMAC is similar to PL330.
That coincidence is merely that.
> Only max 8 request-signals can be active at any time.
> Is my understanding right ?
Correct.
> > The MMCI is connected to two of them.
> I don't know anything about MMCI.
> So I assume it is just another third party MMC controller.
> It simply needs 2 dma channels(for RX, TX each) - be it from a DMAC
> that has a programmable RequestSignal->Peripheral map or a fixed map.
> Is my understanding right ?
Correct.
> > The DMAC can supply any of its physical channels for MMCI.
> The RequestSignal->Peripheral map is decided during board design
> and can not be changed later.
> Is my understanding right ?
No. See the board#3 case..
> > Board 1 has the MMCI connected to request signals #1 and #3.
> > Board 2 has the MMCI connected to request signals #8 and #22.
> Say,
> Board1
> MMCI_RX -> #1
> MMCI_TX -> #3
>
> Board2
> MMCI_RX -> #8
> MMCI_TX -> #22
>
> > Board 3 has the MMCI connected through an external FPGA mux, which can route the
> > MMCI requests to DMA request signals #1, #2 or #3.
> Say
> Board3
> MMCI_RX -> #{1,2,3}
> MMCI_TX -> #{1,2,3}
> And you can't change the route(mapping) after the dmac driver has
> been loaded.
No. You have to change it dynamically at run time according to the
DMA activity, because DMA request signals #1, #2 and #3 are shared
between 6 devices. To make matters worse, it's not six on any of
RQ#1 RQ#2 RQ#3, but some on a couple, some on another couple, and
some on all three.
BTW, we do support this with Linus W's code (which he's posted to
this thread.)
--
Russell King
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
maintainer of:
--
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