lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Oct]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCHv4] DMAEngine: Define interleaved transfer request api
From
Date
On Mon, 2011-10-10 at 21:58 +0530, Jassi Brar wrote:
> On 10 October 2011 21:32, Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-10-10 at 16:46 +0530, Jassi Brar wrote:
> >> On 10 October 2011 16:15, Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > But I am fine if we find a common ground and merge the two where dmac
> >> > can cleanly identify direction and mode it is operating.
> >> >
> >> The client would set the xfer_direction and dmac would interpret as
> >>
> >> enum xfer_direction {
> >> MEM_TO_MEM, -> Async/Memcpy mode
> >> MEM_TO_DEV, -> Slave mode & From Memory to Device
> >> DEV_TO_MEM, -> Slave mode & From Device to Memory
> >> DEV_TO_DEV, -> Slave mode & From Device to Device
> >> }
> >>
> >> How could it get any cleaner?
> > Consider the case of a dmac driver which supports interleaved dma as
> > well as memcpy and slave
> > It needs to interpret dma_data_direction for later cases and
> > xfer_direction for former ones.
> dma_data_direction is the mapping attribute of a buffer and is not meant to
> tell type of source and destination of a transfer.
> xfer_direction is meant for that purpose.
> So I'd rather convert device_prep_dma_cyclic and device_prep_slave_sg
> to use xfer_direction.
If the conversion id done for all drivers, then it should be fine...

--
~Vinod



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-10-11 14:07    [W:0.139 / U:2.932 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site