[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6e29ab5d-070e-0407-96ad-129eb82afc88@posteo.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2021 16:04:49 +0000
From: Richard Genoud <richard.genoud@...teo.net>
To: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>,
ludovic.desroches@...rochip.com, vkoul@...nel.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, jirislaby@...nel.org,
Richard Genoud <richard.genoud@...il.com>
Cc: nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com, alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com,
mripard@...nel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-serial@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/13] tty: serial: atmel: Call dma_async_issue_pending()
Hi,
Le 16/11/2021 à 12:20, Tudor Ambarus a écrit :
> The driver wrongly assummed that tx_submit() will start the transfer,
> which is not the case, now that the at_xdmac driver is fixed. tx_submit
> is supposed to push the current transaction descriptor to a pending queue,
> waiting for issue_pending to be called. issue_pending must start the
> transfer, not tx_submit. While touching atmel_prepare_rx_dma(), introduce
> a local variable for the RX dma channel.
>
> Fixes: 34df42f59a60 ("serial: at91: add rx dma support")
> Fixes: 08f738be88bb ("serial: at91: add tx dma support")
> Signed-off-by: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>
> ---
> drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.c | 20 +++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.c b/drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.c
> index 376f7a9c2868..b3e593f3c17f 100644
> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.c
> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.c
> @@ -1009,6 +1009,8 @@ static void atmel_tx_dma(struct uart_port *port)
> atmel_port->cookie_tx);
> return;
> }
> +
> + dma_async_issue_pending(chan);
> }
>
> if (uart_circ_chars_pending(xmit) < WAKEUP_CHARS)
>From this hunk...
> @@ -1191,6 +1193,7 @@ static void atmel_rx_from_dma(struct uart_port *port)
> static int atmel_prepare_rx_dma(struct uart_port *port)
> {
> struct atmel_uart_port *atmel_port = to_atmel_uart_port(port);
> + struct dma_chan *chan_rx;
> struct device *mfd_dev = port->dev->parent;
> struct dma_async_tx_descriptor *desc;
> dma_cap_mask_t mask;
> @@ -1203,11 +1206,13 @@ static int atmel_prepare_rx_dma(struct uart_port *port)
> dma_cap_zero(mask);
> dma_cap_set(DMA_CYCLIC, mask);
>
> - atmel_port->chan_rx = dma_request_slave_channel(mfd_dev, "rx");
> - if (atmel_port->chan_rx == NULL)
> + chan_rx = dma_request_slave_channel(mfd_dev, "rx");
> + if (chan_rx == NULL)
> goto chan_err;
> + atmel_port->chan_rx = chan_rx;
> +
> dev_info(port->dev, "using %s for rx DMA transfers\n",
> - dma_chan_name(atmel_port->chan_rx));
> + dma_chan_name(chan_rx));
>
> spin_lock_init(&atmel_port->lock_rx);
> sg_init_table(&atmel_port->sg_rx, 1);
> @@ -1239,8 +1244,7 @@ static int atmel_prepare_rx_dma(struct uart_port *port)
> config.src_addr = port->mapbase + ATMEL_US_RHR;
> config.src_maxburst = 1;
>
> - ret = dmaengine_slave_config(atmel_port->chan_rx,
> - &config);
> + ret = dmaengine_slave_config(chan_rx, &config);
> if (ret) {
> dev_err(port->dev, "DMA rx slave configuration failed\n");
> goto chan_err;
> @@ -1249,7 +1253,7 @@ static int atmel_prepare_rx_dma(struct uart_port *port)
> * Prepare a cyclic dma transfer, assign 2 descriptors,
> * each one is half ring buffer size
> */
> - desc = dmaengine_prep_dma_cyclic(atmel_port->chan_rx,
> + desc = dmaengine_prep_dma_cyclic(chan_rx,
> sg_dma_address(&atmel_port->sg_rx),
> sg_dma_len(&atmel_port->sg_rx),
> sg_dma_len(&atmel_port->sg_rx)/2,
...to here :
I think this should go in another patch since these hunks only introduce "chan_rx".
And in this other patch, maybe add a little note on why "atmel_port->chan_rx = chan_rx;"
is after "chan_rx = dma_request_slave_channel(mfd_dev, "rx");"
> @@ -1269,12 +1273,14 @@ static int atmel_prepare_rx_dma(struct uart_port *port)
> goto chan_err;
> }
>
> + dma_async_issue_pending(chan_rx);
> +
> return 0;
>
> chan_err:
> dev_err(port->dev, "RX channel not available, switch to pio\n");
> atmel_port->use_dma_rx = false;
> - if (atmel_port->chan_rx)
> + if (chan_rx)
> atmel_release_rx_dma(port);
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
The rest seems ok.
Thanks !
Richard.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists