lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Oct]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 01/28] dmaengine: use DMA_COMPLETE for dma completion status
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 08:32:12AM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> Hi Vinod
>
> On Fri, 25 Oct 2013, Vinod Koul wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:28:29PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> > > Hi Vinod
> > >
> > > On Thu, 17 Oct 2013, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > > Yes i missed it in first place update the patch to fix that
> > >
> > > Are you planning to post a fixed version of this patch or you just fix it
> > > internally? Would be good to have it posted to be able to ack it and other
> > > relevant patches.
> > looks like you missed it... I had posted updated patch [1] in this thread here
> > and I posted 29th patch as removal one [2]
>
> No, I didn't miss those, but as Sebastian pointed out and as I commented
> too, also that v2 version wasn't correct, so, a fixed v3 was needed.
> Consider this:
>
> In patch 1 you do:
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/dmaengine.h b/include/linux/dmaengine.h
> index 0bc7275..683c380 100644
> --- a/include/linux/dmaengine.h
> +++ b/include/linux/dmaengine.h
> @@ -45,16 +45,17 @@ static inline int dma_submit_error(dma_cookie_t cookie)
>
> /**
> * enum dma_status - DMA transaction status
> - * @DMA_SUCCESS: transaction completed successfully
> + * @DMA_COMPLETE: transaction completed
> * @DMA_IN_PROGRESS: transaction not yet processed
> * @DMA_PAUSED: transaction is paused
> * @DMA_ERROR: transaction failed
> */
> enum dma_status {
> - DMA_SUCCESS,
> + DMA_COMPLETE,
> DMA_IN_PROGRESS,
> DMA_PAUSED,
> DMA_ERROR,
> + DMA_SUCCESS,
> };
>
> /**
>
> and then in a couple of places
>
> - return DMA_SUCCESS;
> + return DMA_COMPLETE;
>
> So, after that your patch dmaengine would be returning DMA_COMPLETE in
> case of success, i.e. 0. But all the DMAC and user drivers would still be
> checking for
>
> if (status != DMA_COMPLETE) {
>
> i.e. comparing status with 4 and thus detecting false errors, until your
> further 28 patches fix them. That's why, as Sebastian pointed out it was
> important to define DMA_COMPLETE and DMA_SUCCESS with the _same_ numerical
> value in your patch 1.
Sure, I will fix this up now as suggested

enum dma_status {
- DMA_SUCCESS,
+ DMA_COMPLETE = 0, DMA_SUCCESS = 0,

Thanks for poiting out.

--
~Vinod


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-10-25 09:01    [W:0.665 / U:2.456 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site