[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3565907.5flGSRLgMJ@wuerfel>
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 20:15:17 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Richard Zhao <rizhao@...dia.com>,
"linux-omap@...r.kernel.org" <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
Richard Zhao <linuxzsc@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] DMA: let filter functions of of_dma_simple_xlate possible check of_node
On Monday 26 August 2013 19:40:57 Vinod Koul wrote:
> Why does DT need the fliter function in the first place. The DT enabled drivers
> should not even have a filter function...
>
> The dmaengine core calls the optional filter function. This needs to be
> implemented in driver in order for driver to check if the channel is what it
> needs or not.
You only just merged the dma_get_slave_channel() patch, which allows having
no filter function. Up to Linux-3.11, the filter was always needed but
could be 'static' and only called by the xlate function. Now the xlate
function can pick a channel itself.
> And the selection should be done for the cases where you dont have programmable
> mux in dmac. For programmable ones passing slave_id in dma_slave_config should
> be fine.
I think passing a slave_id from the slave driver is never correct with DT,
since the ID is a property of the system rather than the slave device, so
the driver has no access to it. Drivers have to always take the settings
from DT and ignore what dma_slave_config() sets later.
Arnd
--
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