[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5638C55D.50001@codeaurora.org>
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 08:31:57 -0600
From: Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>
To: Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org>,
Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>
Cc: dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, cov@...eaurora.org, jcm@...hat.com,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/3] dmaselftest: add memcpy selftest support functions
Sinan Kaya wrote:
>
> Almost all DMA engine drivers come with some sort of selftest code
> called from probe. I followed the same design pattern.
As others have said, it appears that's outdated.
Is there a real possibility that the hardware could fail the test
without trashing the system? It seems that if the DMA engine is faulty,
it won't "politely" fail. The whole system will crash or some memory
will get corrupted and you won't know it.
--
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the
Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation.
--
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