linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] ARM: edma: Rename header file for dmaengine filter function definition

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]

Message-ID: <6448422.mtUnef24Xp@wuerfel>
Date:	Fri, 28 Nov 2014 11:51:37 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com>
Cc:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
	linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux@....linux.org.uk,
	vinod.koul@...el.com, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, nsekhar@...com,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, khilman@...prootsystems.com,
	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, chris@...ntf.net,
	dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, ulf.hansson@...aro.org,
	linux-spi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] ARM: edma: Rename header file for dmaengine filter function definition

On Friday 28 November 2014 09:16:24 Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> On 11/27/2014 11:52 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Thursday 27 November 2014 20:46:12 Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> >>
> >> I see. With this series I did not planed to fix all edma related issues, just
> >> as a start clean up the related header files. I would rather not add fixes to
> >> mmc, spi, etc drivers since while you have valid point it is not in the scope
> >> of this series.
> >> Can we do the changes you are suggesting in an incremental manner?
> > 
> > Sure, but I'd leave the existing filter function declaration alone then
> > and not move it, since we wouldn't want to keep it in the long run.
> 
> but if you want to reference the filter function (which is in
> drivers/dma/edma.c) in arch/arm/mach-davinci/ directory, we will need it.
> Don't we?

Yes, unless you move the definition of the filter function into
arch/arm/common/edma.c or arch/arm/mach-davinci/devices.c, but that
would require other changes.

> If I leave the header as it is, then how would we clean up the edma headers? I
> would not put the API definitions for the arch code into the same file as we
> have the filter definition.

Ok, just go ahead with your current patch then, we can always follow up.
The most important cleanup for edma is elsewhere anyway, so once the asoc
drivers can use the dmaengine interface, this should be easier.

	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/