linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dmaengine: qcom_bam

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <537E1E22.9070701@linaro.org>
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2014 16:56:18 +0100
From:	Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>
To:	Andy Gross <agross@...eaurora.org>
CC:	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>, dmaengine@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dmaengine: qcom_bam_dma: Add descriptor flag APIs



On 22/05/14 16:32, Andy Gross wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 04:27:05PM +0100, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>>
>>> The EOT is not used for every transaction.  It is part of a handshaking
>>> protocol with the attached peripheral, much like the NWD (notify when done).  As
>>> near as I can tell today, no peripheral depends on the EOB, so we could drop it
>>> for now until it is needed and cross this bridge when we need to.
>>
>> As EOT behaviour is totally dependent on the attached peripheral(or
>> channel), Can't we make this specific to channel by passing
>> additional flags in the DT dma channel descriptors? This will be
>> better abstraction for drivers as well.
>
> Even for channels where you want to use EOT, you don't use it for every
> transaction.  So a global channel flag isn't going to work.  This is the same
> for NWD.  It is a per descriptor choice.

Thanks Andy for explaining, I got it now.
>
>>
>> I know that EOT flag is part of descriptor but still some channels
>> *must* have EOT to run there state-machine correctly. So making it
>> optional for those channels might be wrong.
>>
>> Are there any use cases for particular *channel* where EOT
>> requirement changes dynamically?
>
> I2C is one example.  You place EOT on the last transaction that makes up a
> write/read transaction.  You may have multiple descriptors to send data, but the
> last one has EOT.  And for read transactions, you place NWD on the last read
> transaction.
>
> <snip>
>
--
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/