Message-ID: <20250804235140.GB12087@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2025 02:51:40 +0300
From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
To: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Frank Li <Frank.li@....com>, Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>,
	Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>, Sven Peter <sven@...nel.org>,
	Janne Grunau <j@...nau.net>,
	Alyssa Rosenzweig <alyssa@...enzweig.io>,
	Neal Gompa <neal@...pa.dev>,
	Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@...rochip.com>,
	Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>,
	Broadcom internal kernel review list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
	Ray Jui <rjui@...adcom.com>, Scott Branden <sbranden@...adcom.com>,
	Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>,
	Eugeniy Paltsev <Eugeniy.Paltsev@...opsys.com>,
	Viresh Kumar <vireshk@...nel.org>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
	Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
	Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
	Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
	Taichi Sugaya <sugaya.taichi@...ionext.com>,
	Takao Orito <orito.takao@...ionext.com>,
	Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>,
	Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@...nel.org>,
	Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>,
	Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@...il.com>,
	Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
	Patrice Chotard <patrice.chotard@...s.st.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Amélie Delaunay <amelie.delaunay@...s.st.com>,
	Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
	Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
	Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
	Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>,
	Samuel Holland <samuel@...lland.org>,
	Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>,
	Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
	Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...il.com>,
	Kunihiko Hayashi <hayashi.kunihiko@...ionext.com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
	Michal Simek <michal.simek@....com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>,
	Martin Povišer <povik+lin@...ebit.org>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
	Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@...esas.com>,
	Mukesh Kumar Savaliya <quic_msavaliy@...cinc.com>,
	Viken Dadhaniya <quic_vdadhani@...cinc.com>,
	Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
	Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>,
	dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	asahi@...ts.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
	imx@...ts.linux.dev, linux-actions@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
	linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-sound@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/6] dmaengine: Make of_dma_request_slave_channel
 pass a cookie to of_xlate

On Sat, Aug 02, 2025 at 02:37:54PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 8/1/25 2:00 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 02:37:54PM -0400, Frank Li wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 09:04:17PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 12:39:43PM -0400, Frank Li wrote:
> >>>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 11:33:29AM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> >>>>> From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The DMA subsystem attempts to make it theoretically possible to pair
> >>>>> any DMA block with any user. While that's convenient from a
> >>>>> codebase sanity perspective, some blocks are more intertwined.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> One such case is the Qualcomm GENI, where each wrapper contains a
> >>>>> number of Serial Engine instances, each one of which can be programmed
> >>>>> to support a different protocol (such as I2C, I3C, SPI, UART, etc.).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The GPI DMA it's designed together with, needs to receive the ID of the
> >>>>> protocol that's in use, to adjust its behavior accordingly. Currently,
> >>>>> that's done through passing that ID through device tree, with each
> >>>>> Serial Engine expressed NUM_PROTOCOL times, resulting in terrible
> >>>>> dt-bindings that are full of useless copypasta.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In a step to cut down on that, let the DMA user give the engine driver
> >>>>> a hint at request time.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
> >>>>> ---
> 
> [...]
> 
> >>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/of_dma.h b/include/linux/of_dma.h
> >>>>> index fd706cdf255c61c82ce30ef9a2c44930bef34bc8..9f9bc4207b85d48d73c25aad4b362e7c84c01756 100644
> >>>>> --- a/include/linux/of_dma.h
> >>>>> +++ b/include/linux/of_dma.h
> >>>>> @@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ struct of_dma {
> >>>>>  	struct list_head	of_dma_controllers;
> >>>>>  	struct device_node	*of_node;
> >>>>>  	struct dma_chan		*(*of_dma_xlate)
> >>>>> -				(struct of_phandle_args *, struct of_dma *);
> >>>>> +				(struct of_phandle_args *, struct of_dma *, void *);
> >>>>
> >>>> I suggest pass down more informaiton, like client's dev point. So we can
> >>>> auto create device link between client's dev and dma chan's device.
> >>>
> >>> Is .of_dma_xlate() really the right place to do that ? If you want to
> >>> create a device link for PM reasons, isn't it better created when the
> >>> channel is requested ? It should also be removed when the channel is
> >>> freed.
> >>
> >> I remember just need record client device pointer here.
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>> DMA Engineer device
> >>>>    DMA chan device
> >>>>        consumer clients' device.
> >>>>
> >>>> If consumer device runtime pm suspend can auto trigger DMA chan's device's
> >>>> runtime pm function.
> >>>>
> >>>> It will simplifly DMA engine's run time pm manage. Currently many DMA run
> >>>> time pm implement as, runtime_pm_get() when alloc and runtime_pm_put() at
> >>>> free channel.  But many devices request dma channel at probe, which make
> >>>> dma engine work at always 'on' state.
> >>>>
> >>>> But ideally, dma chan should be resume only when it is used to transfer.
> >>>
> >>> This is exactly what I was going to mention after reading the last
> >>> paragraph. Is there anything that prevents a DMA engine driver to
> >>> perform a rutime PM get() when a transfer is submitted
> >>
> >> DMA description is a queue, It is hard to track each descriptor submit and
> >> finished. espcially cycle buffer case.
> >>
> >> And according to dma engine API defination, submit a descriptor not
> >> neccessary to turn on clock, maybe just pure software operation, such as
> >> enqueue it to a software list.
> >>
> >> Many driver call dmaengine_submit() in irq context,  submit new descriptor
> >> when previous descriptor finished. runtime_pm_get() can NOT be called in
> >> atomic context.
> >>
> >> And some driver submit many descripor advance. Only issue_transfer() is
> >> actually trigger hardware to start transfer.
> >>
> >> Some client use cycle descripor, such audio devices.  Some audio devices
> >> have not free descriptor at their run time suspend function, just disable
> >> audio devices's clocks.  Audio devices run time suspend, which means no
> >> one use this dma channel, dma channel can auto suspend if built device link
> >> between audio device and dma chan devices.
> >>
> >> Some DMA client have not devices, such as memory to memory. for this kind
> >> case, it need keep chan always on.
> >>
> >> issue_transfer() can be call in atomic context. but trigger hardware transfer
> >> need clock and runtime_pm_get() can't be called in atomic context.
> >>
> >> Most case issue_transfer() is call in irq handle, which means device should
> >> already be in runtime resume statue.  DMA engine can safely access their
> >> register if using device link.
> > 
> > You have good points there, in particular the fact the issue_transfer()
> > can be called in interrupt context.
> > 
> > For me this calls for new DMA engine operations to "start/stop" the DMA
> > engine (better names are likely needed) from a client perspective.
> > 
> >>> and a put() when
> >>> it completes ? (Logically speaking, the actual implementation would
> >>> likely be a bit different in drivers, but the result would be similar.)
> 
> So.. do you folks want me to alter the patch in any way?

I think the runtime PM issue is orthogonal to the problem this series
addresses. It can be addressed separately.

That being said, I'm not a big fan of passing a void pointer to
.of_xlate() to carry device-specific information, in a device-specific
format. This seems prone to mismatch between clients and DMA engines.
.of_xlate() also seems the wrong place to do this. It would be cleaner
if we could use another operation, such as dmaengine_slave_config() for
instance.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart

Powered by blists - more mailing lists