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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <56139289.7000005@rock-chips.com> Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 17:21:13 +0800 From: Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@...k-chips.com> To: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com> Cc: shawn.lin@...k-chips.com, Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>, Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@...omium.org>, Addy Ke <addy.ke@...k-chips.com>, dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org, alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 06/10] dmaengine: add API for getting dma controller's quirk Hi Vinod, On 2015/10/5 23:37, Vinod Koul wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 07:48:59AM +0800, Shawn Lin wrote: >> Add dmaengine_get_quirks API for peripheral devices to query >> quirks if they need it to make special workaround due to broken >> dma controller design. >> >> Signed-off-by: Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@...k-chips.com> >> --- >> >> Changes in v5: None >> Changes in v4: None >> Changes in v3: None >> Changes in v2: None >> Changes in v1: None >> >> include/linux/dmaengine.h | 9 +++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/include/linux/dmaengine.h b/include/linux/dmaengine.h >> index e2f5eb4..5174ca4 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/dmaengine.h >> +++ b/include/linux/dmaengine.h >> @@ -704,6 +704,7 @@ struct dma_device { >> >> int (*device_config)(struct dma_chan *chan, >> struct dma_slave_config *config); >> + int (*device_get_quirks)(struct dma_chan *chan); > > And why do we want to expose this to users? THis doesnt seem right! > Basically I agree not to expose dma's quirk to slave controllers...But, the fact I mentioned on cover letter explain the reasons why I have to let slave controllers know that they are working with a broken dma. It's a dilemma that if we don't want that to be exposed(let slave controllers' driver get the info via a API), we have to add broken quirk for all of them ,here and there, which seems to be a disaster:( I would appreciate it if you could give me some suggestions at your earliest convenience. :) > A quirk may exists but should be handled inside the controller driver and do > appropriate action. You don't tell users or expect them to handle these > -- Best Regards Shawn Lin -- 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