[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210406165554.5mhn4u5enbf2tvaz@ti.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2021 22:25:56 +0530
From: Pratyush Yadav <p.yadav@...com>
To: Péter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...il.com>
CC: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>,
Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
Benoit Parrot <bparrot@...com>,
Hans Verkuil <hverkuil-cisco@...all.nl>,
Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...omium.org>,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
Stanimir Varbanov <stanimir.varbanov@...aro.org>,
Helen Koike <helen.koike@...labora.com>,
Michael Tretter <m.tretter@...gutronix.de>,
Peter Chen <peter.chen@....com>,
Chunfeng Yun <chunfeng.yun@...iatek.com>,
<linux-media@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org>,
<dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>, Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...asonboard.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/16] dmaengine: ti: k3-psil-j721e: Add entry for CSI2RX
On 06/04/21 06:33PM, Péter Ujfalusi wrote:
>
>
> On 4/6/21 6:09 PM, Pratyush Yadav wrote:
> > On 04/04/21 04:24PM, Péter Ujfalusi wrote:
> >> Hi Pratyush,
> >>
> >> On 3/30/21 8:33 PM, Pratyush Yadav wrote:
> >>> The CSI2RX subsystem uses PSI-L DMA to transfer frames to memory. It can
> >>> have up to 32 threads but the current driver only supports using one. So
> >>> add an entry for that one thread.
> >>
> >> If you are absolutely sure that the other threads are not going to be
> >> used, then:
> >
> > The opposite in fact. I do expect other threads to be used in the
> > future. But the current driver can only use one so I figured it is
> > better to add just the thread that is currently needed and then I can
> > always add the rest later.
> >
> > Why does this have to be a one-and-done deal? Is there anything wrong
> > with adding the other threads when the driver can actually use them?
>
> You can skip CCing DMAengine (and me ;) ). Less subsystems is the better
> when sending patches...
I'm a bit confused here. If you are no longer interested in maintaining
the TI DMA drivers then that's fine, I can skip CCing you. But the patch
is still relevant to the dmaengine list so why should I skip CCing it?
And if I don't CC the dmaengine list then on which list would I get
comments/reviews for the patch?
>
> >
> >> Acked-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...il.com>
> >>
> >> but I would consider adding the other threads if there is a chance that
> >> the cs2rx will need to support it in the future.
> >>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Pratyush Yadav <p.yadav@...com>
> >>> ---
> >>> drivers/dma/ti/k3-psil-j721e.c | 10 ++++++++++
> >>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/dma/ti/k3-psil-j721e.c b/drivers/dma/ti/k3-psil-j721e.c
> >>> index 7580870ed746..19ffa31e6dc6 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/dma/ti/k3-psil-j721e.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/dma/ti/k3-psil-j721e.c
> >>> @@ -58,6 +58,14 @@
> >>> }, \
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> +#define PSIL_CSI2RX(x) \
> >>> + { \
> >>> + .thread_id = x, \
> >>> + .ep_config = { \
> >>> + .ep_type = PSIL_EP_NATIVE, \
> >>> + }, \
> >>> + }
> >>> +
> >>> /* PSI-L source thread IDs, used for RX (DMA_DEV_TO_MEM) */
> >>> static struct psil_ep j721e_src_ep_map[] = {
> >>> /* SA2UL */
> >>> @@ -138,6 +146,8 @@ static struct psil_ep j721e_src_ep_map[] = {
> >>> PSIL_PDMA_XY_PKT(0x4707),
> >>> PSIL_PDMA_XY_PKT(0x4708),
> >>> PSIL_PDMA_XY_PKT(0x4709),
> >>> + /* CSI2RX */
> >>> + PSIL_CSI2RX(0x4940),
> >>> /* CPSW9 */
> >>> PSIL_ETHERNET(0x4a00),
> >>> /* CPSW0 */
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Péter
> >
>
> --
> Péter
--
Regards,
Pratyush Yadav
Texas Instruments Inc.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists