[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200710093834.su3nsjesnhntpd6d@mobilestation>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 12:38:34 +0300
From: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@...kalelectronics.ru>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
CC: Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>, Viresh Kumar <vireshk@...nel.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Alexey Malahov <Alexey.Malahov@...kalelectronics.ru>,
Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 05/11] dmaengine: Introduce DMA-device device_caps
callback
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 11:45:03AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 01:45:44AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > There are DMA devices (like ours version of Synopsys DW DMAC) which have
> > DMA capabilities non-uniformly redistributed between the device channels.
> > In order to provide a way of exposing the channel-specific parameters to
> > the DMA engine consumers, we introduce a new DMA-device callback. In case
> > if provided it gets called from the dma_get_slave_caps() method and is
> > able to override the generic DMA-device capabilities.
>
> In light of recent developments consider not to add 'slave' and a such words to the kernel.
As long as the 'slave' word is used in the name of the dma_slave_caps
structure and in the rest of the DMA-engine subsystem, it will be ambiguous
to use some else terminology. If renaming needs to be done, then it should be
done synchronously for the whole subsystem.
-Sergey
>
>
> --
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists