linux-kernel - Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH v5] sound/soc/lapis: add platform driver for ML7213

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]

Message-ID: <CANKRQnjnHvK_oUOumLyN-s_GY5wYboC-zjQ0niV6+kRHfR14bg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 28 May 2012 14:35:15 +0900
From:	Tomoya MORINAGA <tomoya.rohm@...il.com>
To:	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	alsa-devel@...a-project.org, lars@...afoo.de,
	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Liam Girdwood <lrg@...com>
Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH v5] sound/soc/lapis: add platform driver for ML7213

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>> >> > Nobody seems to be working on it as far as I can tell, I've certainly
>> >> > not seen any patches.
>> >
>> >> If so, could you accept current platform/machine driver ?
>> >
>> > Ideally what would be happening here is that you or other people who
>> > have such systems would be working to add the required support to the
>> > core code, there's clearly a need for common code here as there are a
>> > number of different systems that don't have cyclic DMA and it wouldn't
>> > be great to end up with duplicated code.
>> >
>> > Is there some great difficulty in factoring out the support for
>> > non-cyclic audio DMA on dmaengine - it seems like if there is we must
>> > have a serious problem in dmaengine which we should fix?  If there is a
>> > substantial difficulty then that's different but it doesn't feel like
>> > we've tried doing common code yet, if there's problems doing that I'd
>> > like to understand what they are before we jump ahead of ourselves.
>>
>> I'm not so familiar with Linux's DMA idea.
>> So we don't know whether non-cyclic dmaengine has problem or not.
> First you should not be writing your own dma driver, it *needs* to use
> dmaenegine. We already have bunch of driver supported, so there may be a
> case that existing driver works straight or with little modifications.
> Using your own dma driver is a dead road, so sooner you move over better
> it is.
I've never developed our own dma driver.
I've developed our ASoC driver using linux standard DMA framework.

-- 
ROHM Co., Ltd.
tomoya
--
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/