linux-kernel - RE: [RFC PATCH 1/2] RapidIO: Add DMA Engine support for RIO data transfers

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <0CE8B6BE3C4AD74AB97D9D29BD24E55202321F81@CORPEXCH1.na.ads.idt.com>
Date:	Mon, 17 Oct 2011 11:16:14 -0700
From:	"Bounine, Alexandre" <Alexandre.Bounine@....com>
To:	Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@...aro.org>,
	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>
CC:	Dan <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Matt Porter <mporter@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Li Yang <leoli@...escale.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH 1/2] RapidIO: Add DMA Engine support for RIO data transfers

On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Jassi Brar
<jaswinder.singh@...aro.org> wrote:
> 
> On 15 October 2011 23:05, Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com> wrote:
> 
> > Another alternate approach could be to add one more argument to
> > prep_slave_sg API which allows us to pass additional runtime
specific
> > parameters. This can be NULL and unused for existing drivers and
used
> in
> > RIO and any future subsystems which want to use dmaengine.
> > Thoughts...?
> >
> That doesn't sound much different than passing the data via
> dma_chan.private during prep_slave_sg. Only now we add to
> the number of arguments.
One dma_chan may be used by multiple drivers requesting data transfer.
In this case we will need a lock to keep dma_chan and its private
coupled together. 
If we consider this coupling as a valid way we may think about
adding a lock member into dma_chan structure. This will make locking
more effective for configurations with multiple DMA channels. 

> And then either this argument would be RapidIO specific (unfair
> to other users) or generic. In latter case what would it look like ?
It should not be RapidIO specific. Just transfer specific context that
will be interpreted by participants. Given that we have a channel
filtering mechanism there is a little chance of wrongful usage of
that parameter.

Alex.
--
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/