[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1327912346.1527.13.camel@vkoul-udesk3>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:02:26 +0530
From: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>
To: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@....de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>,
linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7 v2] dmaengine: add a simple dma library
On Thu, 2012-01-26 at 15:56 +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> This patch adds a library of functions, helping to implement dmaengine
> drivers for hardware, unable to handle scatter-gather lists natively.
> The first version of this driver only supports memcpy and slave DMA
> operation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@....de>
> ---
>
> v2:
>
> 1. switch from using a tasklet to threaded IRQ, which allowed to
> 2. remove lock / unlock inline functions
> 3. remove __devinit, __devexit annotations
Sorry to join the discussion late, was on vacation, travel, long
weekend...
I don't still comprehend the need for a library on top of dmaengine
which gain is just a library between clients and dmacs. Surely we don't
want to write another abstraction on top of one provided?
If the question is to handle scatter-gather even if the hardware doesn't
have the capability, then why don't add that in dmaengine itself rather
than one more layer?
--
~Vinod
--
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