lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jul]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/3] DMAENGINE: generic slave channel control v2
From
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Koul, Vinod <vinod.koul@intel.com> wrote:
>> 2010/7/22 Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@stericsson.com>:
>>
>> > This adds an interface to the DMAengine to make it possible to
>> > reconfigure a slave channel at runtime. We add a few foreseen
>> > config parameters to the passed struct, with a void * pointer
>> > for custom per-device or per-platform runtime slave data.
>>
>> BTW Vinod, if you're happy with this API, then please ACK it so
>> Dan has some indication whether it'll fit the Moorestown too.
>
> Shouldn't this patch remove the private member in dma_chan structure
>
> Currently chan->private is used for sending slave or similar channel specific
> information. Now if we want to add struct dma_slave_config, then IMHO it
> would make sense to remove private variable and replace with dma_slave_config
> struture. That way we can reuse this struture there as well and if someone wants
> to add more stuff he can use the private_config.
>
> Dan, what do you think about this?

If you take a look at the current usages of chan->private I don't
think all of them are met by this interface.

We have:

struct at_dma_slave {
struct device *dma_dev;
dma_addr_t tx_reg;
dma_addr_t rx_reg;
enum at_dma_slave_width reg_width;
u32 cfg;
u32 ctrla;
};

struct dw_dma_slave {
struct device *dma_dev;
dma_addr_t tx_reg;
dma_addr_t rx_reg;
enum dw_dma_slave_width reg_width;
u32 cfg_hi;
u32 cfg_lo;
};

struct fsl_dma_slave {

/* List of hardware address/length pairs */
struct list_head addresses;

/* Support for extra controller features */
unsigned int request_count;
unsigned int src_loop_size;
unsigned int dst_loop_size;
bool external_start;
bool external_pause;
};

struct dma_pl330_peri {
/*
* Peri_Req i/f of the DMAC that is
* peripheral could be reached from.
*/
u8 peri_id; /* {0, 31} */
enum pl330_reqtype rqtype;

/* For M->D and D->M Channels */
int burst_sz; /* in power of 2 */
dma_addr_t fifo_addr;
};

struct sh_dmae_slave {
unsigned int slave_id; /* Set by the platform */
struct device *dma_dev; /* Set by the platform */
const struct sh_dmae_slave_config *config; /* Set by
the driver */
};

struct sh_dmae_slave_config {
unsigned int slave_id;
dma_addr_t addr;
u32 chcr;
char mid_rid;
};

struct txx9dmac_slave {
u64 tx_reg;
u64 rx_reg;
unsigned int reg_width;
};

...and I don't think this interface should try to meet all these
requirements because there will always be arch-specific quirks that
make things fall down. I think we should just start with an interface
that is minimally useful for the drivers that want to take advantage
of it. We could, since there is usually driver-specific knowledge
known by the client in the dma-slave case, just require that a
dma_slave_config be container_of() promoted to a driver specific
config. This lets the non-esoteric platform configurations use the
generic definition.

--
Dan


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-07-23 01:17    [W:2.112 / U:0.004 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site