linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 2/4] dma: add dmaengine driver for Samsung s3c24xx SoCs

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:	Tue, 14 May 2013 14:47:19 +0200
From:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:	Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Dan Williams <djbw@...com>, Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-samsung-soc <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/4] dma: add dmaengine driver for Samsung s3c24xx SoCs

On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de> wrote:

> Conceptually the s3c24xx-dma feels like a distant relative of the pl08x
> with numerous virtual channels being mapped to a lot less physical ones.
> The driver therefore borrows a lot from the amba-pl08x driver in this
> regard. Functionality-wise the driver gains a memcpy ability in addition
> to the slave_sg one.
>
> The driver currently only supports the "newer" SoCs which can use any
> physical channel for any dma slave. Support for the older SoCs where
> each channel only supports a subset of possible dma slaves will have to
> be added later.
>
> Tested on a s3c2416-based board, memcpy using the dmatest module and
> slave_sg partially using the spi-s3c64xx driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>

So have I understood correctly if I assume that *some* S3C
variants, i.e. this: arch/arm/mach-s3c64xx/dma.c
have a vanilla, unmodified, or just slightly modified
PL08x block, while this DMAC is something probably based on
the PL08x where some ASIC engineer has had a good time hacking
around in the VHDL code to meet some feature requirements.
Correct? Or plausible guess?

Exactly *how* far away from the pl08x hardware is it?

I guess you have already come to the conclusion that the
amba-pl08x.c driver cannot be augmented to handle this hardware
after some educated reading of that code?

But are really no parts reusable?

For example, if the LLIs have the same layout, could we split
out the LLI handling from amba-pl08x into a separate file and reuse
that?

The more you share with amba-pl08x the better for everyone,
I am positively sure. And please include Russell on the review
chain, he wrote the virtual channel abstraction.

If I was given the option amongst S3C work I would definatley
have augmented the amba-pl08x.c to handle the stuff in
arch/arm/mach-s3c64xx/dma.c *first* then started to work on
this driver, but I guess you might not be working on s3c64xx?

Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
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/