linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 03/15] dmaengine: Add no_wakeup parameter to dmaengine_prep_dma

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: <1347615488.1943.47.camel@vkoul-udesk3>
Date:	Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:08:08 +0530
From:	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com>
Cc:	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	Liam Girdwood <lrg@...com>, Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
	Russell King <rmk+kernel@....linux.org.uk>,
	Dan Williams <djbw@...com>,
	Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@...mer.com>,
	alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Janusz Krzysztofik <jkrzyszt@....icnet.pl>,
	Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/15] dmaengine: Add no_wakeup parameter to
 dmaengine_prep_dma_cyclic()

On Fri, 2012-09-14 at 12:28 +0300, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 09/14/2012 11:50 AM, Vinod Koul wrote:
> >> Well, the idea was that the driver would disable interrupts if there is no
> >> callback to call, since there would be nothing to do in the interrupt
> >> handler anyway. But I guess the flags approach should work fine as well.
> > Yes we _could_ do that, but this relies on dmaengine driver to have this
> > implicit understanding. Anyone using dmaengine library in ASoC may or
> > may not be aware of this, so i would consider it hackish.
> > 
> > Using this flag explicitly makes everyone aware what the intended
> > behaviour is.
> 
> I'm not sure about which flags should ASoC set for the two case we are going
> to have. I think it should be something like this:
> 
> unsigned long flags = DMA_CTRL_ACK;
usage of ACK flag is mostly async_tx thingy, we can skip it for slave.
> 
> if (!substream->runtime->no_period_wakeup)
> 	flags |= DMA_PREP_INTERRUPT;
> I'm not 100% sure of the role of DMA_CTRL_ACK in this case. Or should we only
> handle the DMA_PREP_INTERRUPT flag, like this:
> 
> unsigned long flags = 0;
> 
> if (!substream->runtime->no_period_wakeup)
> 	flags |= DMA_PREP_INTERRUPT;
> 
> 
> What do you think?
Looks fine.

-- 
~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/