[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VeZFXp9i_zz7CBkVQVPGQxuzYk9AbWbbbn33r8YX3LCdw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 17:43:04 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com>,
Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
dmaengine <dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-serial@...r.kernel.org" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-omap@...r.kernel.org" <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux MMC List <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-crypto <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-spi <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
ALSA Development Mailing List <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/13] dmaengine: Introduce dma_request_slave_channel_compat_reason()
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 November 2015 16:41:35 Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
>> On 11/18/2015 04:29 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> > On Wednesday 18 November 2015 16:21:26 Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
>> >> 2. non slave channel requests, where only the functionality matters, like
>> >> memcpy, interleaved, memset, etc.
>> >> We could have a simple:
>> >> dma_request_channel(mask);
>> >>
>> >> But looking at the drivers using dmaengine legacy dma_request_channel() API:
>> >> Some sets DMA_INTERRUPT or DMA_PRIVATE or DMA_SG along with DMA_SLAVE:
>> >> drivers/misc/carma/carma-fpga.c DMA_INTERRUPT|DMA_SLAVE|DMA_SG
>> >> drivers/misc/carma/carma-fpga-program.c DMA_MEMCPY|DMA_SLAVE|DMA_SG
>> >> drivers/media/platform/soc_camera/mx3_camera.c DMA_SLAVE|DMA_PRIVATE
>> >> sound/soc/intel/common/sst-firmware.c DMA_SLAVE|DMA_MEMCPY
>> >>
>> >> as examples.
>> >> Not sure how valid are these...
>
> I just had a look myself. carma has been removed fortunately in linux-next,
> so we don't have to worry about that any more.
>
> I assume that the sst-firmware.c case is a mistake, it should just use a
> plain DMA_SLAVE and not DMA_MEMCPY.
Other way around.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
--
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