[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190410152820.GT6106@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 16:28:20 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Flavio Suligoi <f.suligoi@...m.it>
Cc: Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>,
Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@...il.com>,
Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-spi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] spi: pxa2xx: use a module softdep for dw_dmac
On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 02:05:38PM +0000, Flavio Suligoi wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> > While this isn't going to hurt anything and might actually help so it's
> > fine doesn't this also suggest that there's an issue with deferred probe
> > going on as well?
> I think that the problem could be related to how the DMA channel is requested.
> At the moment the function used are:
> pxa2xx_spi_dma_setup --> dma_request_slave_channel_compat -->
> --> __dma_request_slave_channel_compat --> dma_request_slave_channel -->
> --> dma_request_chan
> Actually the final function "dma_request_chan" return
> the channel number or "-EPROBE_DEFER" if it's not ready.
> But this information ("-EPROBE_DEFER") is lost in the penultimate function
> "dma_request_slave_channel", which return only the chann, if all is ok, or
> NULL, in case of errors.
> So the deferral mechanism is not used.
Right, yes - that analysis seems correct. The interfaces seem a bit
weird here but fixing them looks like the most complete and robust fix.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists