Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 26 Sep 2012 20:55:36 +0300 | Subject | Re: [PATCHv2 2/4] dmaengine: dw_dmac: Add PCI part of the driver | From | Andy Shevchenko <> |
| |
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 5:33 PM, viresh kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote: > Forgot earlier, please keep spear-devel in cc... They will be going to > use dw_dmac driver :) Oh, my bad. v3 will be Cc'ed there as well. Sorry.
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Andy Shevchenko > <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote: >> diff --git a/drivers/dma/dw_dmac_pci.c b/drivers/dma/dw_dmac_pci.c >> +#include <linux/module.h> >> +#include <linux/pci.h> >> +#include <linux/platform_device.h> >> +#include <linux/dw_dmac.h> >> + >> +#define DRIVER(_is_private, _chan_order, _chan_pri) \ >> + ((kernel_ulong_t)&(struct dw_dma_platform_data) { \ >> + .is_private = (_is_private), \ >> + .chan_allocation_order = (_chan_order), \ >> + .chan_priority = (_chan_pri), \ > > I believe you don't need these braces around input variables on right side > of "=". Even if there is something complex passed. Hmm... Have no idea if anyone will use robust stuff as a parameter to that macro. I could remove them.
> > Did you try to align "\"? Sorry can't see it in gmail :( I checked - I have tabular indentation, that's why you see them at different columns. In vi they look pretty well formated.
[snip]
>> + pd = platform_device_alloc("dw_dmac", instance); >> + if (!pd) { >> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "can't allocate dw_dmac platform device\n"); >> + ret = -ENOMEM; >> + goto err0; >> + } > > Is this the correct approach? I doubt... We are creating a platform > device from a > pci driver... Don't know if it can lead to some issues within kernel. > > Lets call the specialist for his comments :) > @Arnd: Can you please help us here? This approach is used among different drivers in kernel. As first example that comes to my mind you could consider chipidea USB driver (drivers/usb/chipidea).
-- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
| |