[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZGYKQkgRrBqO2rsx@gerhold.net>
Date: Thu, 18 May 2023 13:21:38 +0200
From: Stephan Gerhold <stephan@...hold.net>
To: Bhupesh Sharma <bhupesh.sharma@...aro.org>
Cc: Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, dmaengine@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dmaengine: qcom: bam_dma: make channels/EEs optional in
DT with clock
On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 04:43:57PM +0530, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> On Thu, 18 May 2023 at 14:56, Stephan Gerhold <stephan@...hold.net> wrote:
> >
> > If we have a BAM clock in the DT we are able to turn on the BAM
> > controller while probing, so there is no need to read "num-channels"
> > and "qcom,num-ees" from the DT. It can be read more accurately directly
> > from the identification registers of the BAM.
> >
> > This simplifies setting up typical controlled-remotely BAM DMAs in the
> > DT that can be turned on via a clock (e.g. the BLSP DMA).
>
> Can you please list which qcom board(s) you tested this patch on?
>
It works fine at least on MSM8916/DB410c (for blsp_dma) and MDM9607
(blsp_dma and qpic_dma (for NAND)). More testing would be much
appreciated of course!
Personally I don't see much of a risk: If enabling the clock doesn't
actually enable the BAM controller, then the clock probably does not
belong to the BAM in the first place... :)
Thanks,
Stephan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists