linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Documentation: dmaengine: Add a documentation for the dma controller API

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <53DB490A.5040709@metafoo.de>
Date:	Fri, 01 Aug 2014 10:00:10 +0200
From:	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>
To:	Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
CC:	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Antoine Ténart <antoine@...e-electrons.com>,
	Thomas Petazzoni <thomas@...e-electrons.com>,
	Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
	Boris Brezillon <boris@...e-electrons.com>,
	Matt Porter <matt.porter@...aro.org>,
	laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com, ludovic.desroches@...el.com,
	Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>,
	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: dmaengine: Add a documentation for the
 dma controller API

On 07/31/2014 07:37 PM, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 06:54:11PM +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
>> On 07/31/2014 06:13 PM, Maxime Ripard wrote:
>> [...]
>>>  From what you're saying, and judging from the drivers that already
>>> implement it, can't it be moved directly to the framework itself ?
>>>
>>
>> What exactly do you mean by moving it directly to the framework? The
>> slave_caps API is part of the DMAengine framework.
>
> Not its implementation, which is defined by each and every driver,
> while the behaviour of device_slave_caps is rather generic.
>

Do you mean something like adding a dma_slave_caps struct field to the DMA 
channel that gets initialized when the channel is created and then remove 
the callback? That makes some sense.

I think the main reason why we use a callback right now is that in earlier 
revisions of the API it was possible to pass a slave_config and the result 
would be the capabilities of the DMA channel for this particular config. But 
this was dropped before the final version was merged upstream.

- Lars
--
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/