[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1303111302340.21241@axis700.grange>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 13:26:01 +0100 (CET)
From: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@....de>
To: "Shevchenko, Andriy" <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Koul, Vinod" <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd.bergmann@...aro.org>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: A proposal to check the device in generic way
Hi Andriy
(adding Russell to CC)
On Mon, 11 Mar 2013, Shevchenko, Andriy wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Currently in linux-next we have the following things:
>
> $ git grep -n 'chan->device->dev->driver' drivers/dma/
>
> drivers/dma/amba-pl08x.c:1594: if (chan->device->dev->driver !=
> &pl08x_amba_driver.drv)
> drivers/dma/dmaengine.c:190: return chan->device->dev->driver->owner;
> drivers/dma/edma.c:609: if (chan->device->dev->driver ==
> &edma_driver.driver) {
> drivers/dma/omap-dma.c:654: if (chan->device->dev->driver ==
> &omap_dma_driver.driver) {
> drivers/dma/pl330.c:2374: if (chan->device->dev->driver !=
> &pl330_driver.drv)
> drivers/dma/sa11x0-dma.c:1080: if (chan->device->dev->driver ==
> &sa11x0_dma_driver.driver)
>
> I think it's a non-generic way to check which driver provides a channel
> into filter function. First of all, I don't get why that comparison goes
> as deep as driver structure. Isn't clearer to check chan->device->dev
> against the struct dev passed in the custom parameter structure? Like:
>
> struct filter_params {
> struct dev *dev;
> void *param;
> };
I don't think you always know which DMA device you want to use with this
DMA client - sometimes there are several DMA engine devices, that can be
used with your DMA client, or even if it's only one, you don't necessarily
have a pointer to it in your DMA client.
Thanks
Guennadi
> bool filter_fn(struct dma_chan *chan, void *fparams)
> {
> struct filter_params *p = fparams;
> if (chan->device->dev != p->dev)
> return false;
> ...
> }
>
> In case my idea has a right to live, what about to move such check inside
> DMA engine code?
>
> Opinions, comments?
>
> Earlier I tried to discuss this with Arnd here: http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg220716.html
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
--
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