linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7] spi: sun4i: Allow transfers larger than FIFO size

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20161102174753.elbukxnrc3x27xxc@lukather>
Date:   Wed, 2 Nov 2016 18:47:53 +0100
From:   Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     Alexandru Gagniuc <mr.nuke.me@...il.com>, wens@...e.org,
        linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7] spi: sun4i: Allow transfers larger than FIFO size

Hi Mark,

On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 11:47:12PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > If the concern from the previous reviews to do with not using DMA is
> > > there some reason it's hard to do DMA?
> 
> > I think just like Alexandru that it is orthogonal. But to really
> > answer, no, it's not difficult. There's just been some fundamental
> > disagreement on whether DMA was supposed to be optional or not that
> > stalled everything I guess.
> 
> Oh, I seem to remember some patches adding DMA support that were doing
> some strange special snowflake thing with ignoring errors now that I
> think about it but that's not this one...  why did nobody ever follow up
> on those?

I have no idea. I think last time we discussed this was last
July. Especially with this in now, there's probably no rush anyway.

Maxime

-- 
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (802 bytes)