Hello!
It seems the one (as I think good) question was left unanswered:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg186120.html
What is your opinions, comments?
--
Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
Intel Finland Oy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Finland Oy
Registered Address: PL 281, 00181 Helsinki
Business Identity Code: 0357606 - 4
Domiciled in Helsinki
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
????{.n?+???????+%?????ݶ??w??{.n?+????{??G?????{ay? ʇڙ?,j??f???h?????????z_??(?階?ݢj"???m??????G????????????&???~???iO???z??v?^?m???? ????????I?
On Monday 18 March 2013, Shevchenko, Andriy wrote:
> Hello!
>
> It seems the one (as I think good) question was left unanswered:
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg186120.html
>
> What is your opinions, comments?
I'm not sure I understand what the question was. Is this about
whether we should remove the "slave_id" field in the slave
configuration?
Those sort of duplicate the request line information that comes
from the platform in a data structure that should be filled by
the device driver without platform specific knowledge.
I believe that is currently used by shmobile, and we won't be able
to kill that before that platform has been converted to use
dma_request_slave_channel.
Arnd
On Monday 18 March 2013, Shevchenko, Andriy wrote:
> Hello!
>
> It seems the one (as I think good) question was left unanswered:
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg186120.html
>
> What is your opinions, comments?
I'm not sure I understand what the question was. Is this about
whether we should remove the "slave_id" field in the slave
configuration?
Those sort of duplicate the request line information that comes
from the platform in a data structure that should be filled by
the device driver without platform specific knowledge.
I believe that is currently used by shmobile, and we won't be able
to kill that before that platform has been converted to use
dma_request_slave_channel.
Arnd
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 01:30:29PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Monday 18 March 2013, Shevchenko, Andriy wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> > It seems the one (as I think good) question was left unanswered:
> > http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg186120.html
> >
> > What is your opinions, comments?
>
> I'm not sure I understand what the question was. Is this about
> whether we should remove the "slave_id" field in the slave
> configuration?
Ditto :)
The slave_id memeber in dma_slave_config should be used for this
>
> Those sort of duplicate the request line information that comes
> from the platform in a data structure that should be filled by
> the device driver without platform specific knowledge.
>
> I believe that is currently used by shmobile, and we won't be able
> to kill that before that platform has been converted to use
> dma_request_slave_channel.
>
> Arnd