linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH/RFC] dmaengine: add a slave parameter to __dma_request

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

Date:	Mon, 19 Mar 2012 19:52:18 +0530
From:	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>
To:	Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@....de>
Cc:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	'Jassi Brar' <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] dmaengine: add a slave parameter to
 __dma_request_channel()

On Mon, 2012-03-19 at 15:09 +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> YES! This is exactly what I am talking about! We need an additional 
> parameter to dma_request_channel(). Whereas in the discussion, that you 
> pointed me to, it still had the same 3 parameters, as now. (Maybe this has 
> already been decided upon before - to add an additional parameter, not 
> sure anymore, this thread has become too long and too slow... My apologies 
> in this case) So, this can be a device pointer or some specialised slave 
> ID. Device pointer is nice, I agree. And the next change, that I'd like to 
> request is pass this parameter further on to DMA device driver's 
> .device_alloc_chan_resources() method. 
Sorry my bad. I confused your request for additional parameter as
request for adding slave_config etc stuff into request API.

Yes this API would need to be modified for telling dmaengine about
client. Now Given that this is more slave stuff, I have leaning to
adding a slave specific request api, something like
dmaengine_request_slave_channel() which is used for our purpose while
keeping the original API intact for async_tx usages.

Btw why should .device_alloc_chan_resources() need this, I so no reason,
unless we are working around some other issue.

-- 
~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/