Received: by 2002:a25:4158:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id o85csp365429yba; Sat, 4 May 2019 04:08:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqze5UJLUXz8dalivk8d6Q6rBHhctZTK3MpevXIUcAysDo50TiJALPHcw4gMJx6Tn7aObPg8 X-Received: by 2002:a63:f44f:: with SMTP id p15mr12646761pgk.65.1556968114486; Sat, 04 May 2019 04:08:34 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1556968114; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=eK5MlFKIlVluHGPbBnjCSGzGiQQbCD6OcFaJRbq74qnn9yCdlYK2lTn3MZZGnqgy/q dd2qaDAk6cLBLZfJYnxEe/7UcM9Mfawvhpu0E570ljPt3WudI1UX9rz6Cd9y94orRnDw IzSLHRpiDExmAcF/qrJ+S+KaTFt2b95acN1uAyeo6Yho+ghJHtLzAuD5co6kOhKlc2qN IFCUute9lx3q7QoDN54i02utODk7S2lDTcnViH6RF6b2m5vapr+BWtyFG1TOxq1E42ni wqKysZJHiGSr+Gzd7nL5tDxneASo0NRfCRdcLliFGSHQ8FwR+cO40SWaHJRZhsT1Cnei 3bhg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=UHBu2bL2eqrDgw29r37sBGafqaG4p6IqKxe3O4KLbhw=; b=Bv40wmwPMmUAtIK2xmUIv4CsX2dFAHbYjMxtT96HoU0X1XQ2pVj95ar24/T6M2DDts hRIPEFOfBmCU+Ip7/KbGaT5ZbAljjvQ21RU+Iw6PIrxgcs6MHzC1ZiPpo8KBx3STfmn7 DZ0YNYuOXqjMp2J8kIDjavYZ3KX/YbKfiGs4ndAQZAFSJYvh3yu/d9R+Md3iXbuiO1cB Z1SB53WYTZwqNhVawhSHQCnf23y5MBjkn24fQ1G7sVSPzhNyvcvEOdIElMDadqJ5+SOG X+uZVbAylH4EbM4L8+o2v/Yvfj8hdAcEv8AfUgZxIaTjYZWhhdHGtzv2yCFeKpR2MlhV TpRA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=default header.b=vIvgQAAJ; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id f20si6246300pgj.278.2019.05.04.04.08.18; Sat, 04 May 2019 04:08:34 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=default header.b=vIvgQAAJ; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727258AbfEDKXQ (ORCPT + 99 others); Sat, 4 May 2019 06:23:16 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:33584 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726631AbfEDKXP (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 May 2019 06:23:15 -0400 Received: from localhost (unknown [171.76.113.243]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 34DC1206BB; Sat, 4 May 2019 10:23:12 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1556965394; bh=l3Xmchzoy355shuJN+rybTT5lgs3HpoVHmcBPPwvdw0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=vIvgQAAJjm99iKHQb50KLr6KkU85Hi9OPPJZZXOdBz6InhdjA7o2UBQvsSdxVBy2a snTo30dEEUyOrMigvD1dKsY6aXWLjuHoxvUbV1b0hLrxvUpGGnacaLhgZ5zkuSJDVx XXQBBqJW5SIfjZVJf41xQhnvaKq+nnbnvSQHWbDU= Date: Sat, 4 May 2019 15:53:04 +0530 From: Vinod Koul To: Sameer Pujar Cc: dan.j.williams@intel.com, tiwai@suse.com, jonathanh@nvidia.com, dmaengine@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] dmaengine: add fifo_size member Message-ID: <20190504102304.GZ3845@vkoul-mobl.Dlink> References: <1556623828-21577-1-git-send-email-spujar@nvidia.com> <20190502060446.GI3845@vkoul-mobl.Dlink> <20190502122506.GP3845@vkoul-mobl.Dlink> <3368d1e1-0d7f-f602-5b96-a978fcf4d91b@nvidia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <3368d1e1-0d7f-f602-5b96-a978fcf4d91b@nvidia.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 02-05-19, 18:59, Sameer Pujar wrote: > > On 5/2/2019 5:55 PM, Vinod Koul wrote: > > On 02-05-19, 16:23, Sameer Pujar wrote: > > > On 5/2/2019 11:34 AM, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > > On 30-04-19, 17:00, Sameer Pujar wrote: > > > > > During the DMA transfers from memory to I/O, it was observed that transfers > > > > > were inconsistent and resulted in glitches for audio playback. It happened > > > > > because fifo size on DMA did not match with slave channel configuration. > > > > > > > > > > currently 'dma_slave_config' structure does not have a field for fifo size. > > > > > Hence the platform pcm driver cannot pass the fifo size as a slave_config. > > > > > Note that 'snd_dmaengine_dai_dma_data' structure has fifo_size field which > > > > > cannot be used to pass the size info. This patch introduces fifo_size field > > > > > and the same can be populated on slave side. Users can set required size > > > > > for slave peripheral (multiple channels can be independently running with > > > > > different fifo sizes) and the corresponding sizes are programmed through > > > > > dma_slave_config on DMA side. > > > > FIFO size is a hardware property not sure why you would want an > > > > interface to program that? > > > > > > > > On mismatch, I guess you need to take care of src/dst_maxburst.. > > > Yes, FIFO size is a HW property. But it is SW configurable(atleast in my > > > case) on > > > slave side and can be set to different sizes. The src/dst_maxburst is > > Are you sure, have you talked to HW folks on that? IIUC you are > > programming the data to be used in FIFO not the FIFO length! > Yes, I mentioned about FIFO length. > > 1. MAX FIFO size is fixed in HW. But there is a way to limit the usage per > channel > ?? in multiples of 64 bytes. > 2. Having a separate member would give independent control over MAX BURST > SIZE and > ?? FIFO SIZE. > > > > > programmed > > > for specific values, I think this depends on few factors related to > > > bandwidth > > > needs of client, DMA needs of the system etc., > > Precisely > > > > > In such cases how does DMA know the actual FIFO depth of slave peripheral? > > Why should DMA know? Its job is to push/pull data as configured by > > peripheral driver. The peripheral driver knows and configures DMA > > accordingly. > I am not sure if there is any HW logic that mandates DMA to know the size > of configured FIFO depth on slave side. I will speak to HW folks and > would update here. I still do not comprehend why dma would care about slave side configuration. In the absence of patch which uses this I am not sure what you are trying to do... > > > > > Request for feedback/suggestions. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sameer Pujar > > > > > --- > > > > > include/linux/dmaengine.h | 3 +++ > > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/dmaengine.h b/include/linux/dmaengine.h > > > > > index d49ec5c..9ec198b 100644 > > > > > --- a/include/linux/dmaengine.h > > > > > +++ b/include/linux/dmaengine.h > > > > > @@ -351,6 +351,8 @@ enum dma_slave_buswidth { > > > > > * @slave_id: Slave requester id. Only valid for slave channels. The dma > > > > > * slave peripheral will have unique id as dma requester which need to be > > > > > * pass as slave config. > > > > > + * @fifo_size: Fifo size value. The dma slave peripheral can configure required > > > > > + * fifo size and the same needs to be passed as slave config. > > > > > * > > > > > * This struct is passed in as configuration data to a DMA engine > > > > > * in order to set up a certain channel for DMA transport at runtime. > > > > > @@ -376,6 +378,7 @@ struct dma_slave_config { > > > > > u32 dst_port_window_size; > > > > > bool device_fc; > > > > > unsigned int slave_id; > > > > > + u32 fifo_size; > > > > > }; > > > > > /** > > > > > -- > > > > > 2.7.4 -- ~Vinod