[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2708248.TZ13zqn6jW@wuerfel>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 11:28:57 +0100
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>,
Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
Daniel Mack <zonque@...il.com>,
Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@...il.com>,
dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] ARM: pxa: transition to dmaengine phase 1
On Saturday 14 February 2015 23:47:33 Robert Jarzmik wrote:
> @@ -294,7 +294,8 @@ int pxa_request_dma (char *name, pxa_dma_prio prio,
> /* try grabbing a DMA channel with the requested priority */
> for (i = 0; i < num_dma_channels; i++) {
> if ((dma_channels[i].prio == prio) &&
> - !dma_channels[i].name) {
> + !dma_channels[i].name &&
> + !mmp_pdma_toggle_reserved_channel(i)) {
> found = 1;
> break;
> }
>
How is the order between the two enforced? I.e. can it be that the dmaengine
driver uses the same channel for a different slave before we get here?
If this is ensured to work, I'm fine with your approach.
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