linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 10/13] spi: omap2-mcspi: dma_request_slave

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: <1348738594.1648.9.camel@vkoul-udesk3>
Date:	Thu, 27 Sep 2012 15:06:34 +0530
From:	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Matt Porter <mporter@...com>
Cc:	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Linux DaVinci Kernel List 
	<davinci-linux-open-source@...ux.davincidsp.com>,
	Linux OMAP List <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Benoit Cousson <b-cousson@...com>,
	Linux Documentation List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux MMC List <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
	Devicetree Discuss <devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>, Dan Williams <djbw@...com>,
	Linux SPI Devel List 
	<spi-devel-general@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	Chris Ball <cjb@...top.org>,
	Linux ARM Kernel List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 10/13] spi: omap2-mcspi:
 dma_request_slave_channel() support for DT platforms

On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 14:37 -0400, Matt Porter wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 08:42:47AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > 
> > Can't we come up with a version of dma_request_slave_channel that works
> > both ways for now:
> > 
> > 	mcspi_dma->dma_rx =
> > 		dma_request_slave_channel_compat(mask, omap_dma_filter_fn, &sig,
> > 					&master->dev, mcspi_dma->dma_rx_ch_name);
> > 	...			
> > 
> > Then it's just question of patching away two lines later on rather than
> > having to add all this if else to all the drivers first, then patching
> > it away again.
> 
> I think that something like that is workable with the implementation
> simply checking for of_node to do the right thing.
Yes, I think it would be better to have common API but underneath two
implementations in transitional phase.



-- 
~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/