[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150327202230.GA4027@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 20:22:30 +0000
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com>
Cc: vinod.koul@...el.com, tony@...mide.com, grant.likely@...aro.org,
dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, robh+dt@...nel.org, nm@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] dmaengine: omap-dma: Remove mapping between
virtual channels and requests
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 02:26:52PM +0200, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> Do not direct map the virtual channels to sDMA request number. When the
> sDMA is behind of a crossbar this direct mapping can cause situations when
> certain channel can not be requested since the crossbar request number
> will no longer match with the sDMA request line.
> The direct mapping for virtual channels with HW request lines will make it
> harder to implement MEM_TO_MEM mode for the driver.
There's no point having 127 virtual DMA channels then... is there?
We might as well reduce the number down to a more reasonable set
rather than wasting memory.
> @@ -1049,7 +1050,6 @@ static int omap_dma_chan_init(struct omap_dmadev *od, int dma_sig)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> c->reg_map = od->reg_map;
> - c->dma_sig = dma_sig;
That's the only user of dma_sig in this function. Why not remove it from
the function prototype and its caller?
--
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 10.5Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
--
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