Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 29 Jun 2020 15:24:46 +0530
From:   Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
To:     =?iso-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9?= Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>
Cc:     Amit Singh Tomar <amittomer25@gmail.com>, afaerber@suse.de,
        manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org, dan.j.williams@intel.com,
        cristian.ciocaltea@gmail.com, dmaengine@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-actions@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/10] dmaengine: Actions: Add support for S700 DMA
 engine
Message-ID: <20200629095446.GH2599@vkoul-mobl>
References: <1591697830-16311-1-git-send-email-amittomer25@gmail.com>
 <1591697830-16311-3-git-send-email-amittomer25@gmail.com>
 <20200624061529.GF2324254@vkoul-mobl>
 <75d154d0-2962-99e6-a7c7-bf0928ec8b2a@arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <75d154d0-2962-99e6-a7c7-bf0928ec8b2a@arm.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 24-06-20, 10:35, Andr? Przywara wrote:
> On 24/06/2020 07:15, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > On 09-06-20, 15:47, Amit Singh Tomar wrote:
> > 
> >> @@ -372,6 +383,7 @@ static inline int owl_dma_cfg_lli(struct owl_dma_vchan *vchan,
> >>  				  struct dma_slave_config *sconfig,
> >>  				  bool is_cyclic)
> >>  {
> >> +	struct owl_dma *od = to_owl_dma(vchan->vc.chan.device);
> >>  	u32 mode, ctrlb;
> >>  
> >>  	mode = OWL_DMA_MODE_PW(0);
> >> @@ -427,14 +439,26 @@ static inline int owl_dma_cfg_lli(struct owl_dma_vchan *vchan,
> >>  	lli->hw[OWL_DMADESC_DADDR] = dst;
> >>  	lli->hw[OWL_DMADESC_SRC_STRIDE] = 0;
> >>  	lli->hw[OWL_DMADESC_DST_STRIDE] = 0;
> >> -	/*
> >> -	 * Word starts from offset 0xC is shared between frame length
> >> -	 * (max frame length is 1MB) and frame count, where first 20
> >> -	 * bits are for frame length and rest of 12 bits are for frame
> >> -	 * count.
> >> -	 */
> >> -	lli->hw[OWL_DMADESC_FLEN] = len | FCNT_VAL << 20;
> >> -	lli->hw[OWL_DMADESC_CTRLB] = ctrlb;
> >> +
> >> +	if (od->devid == S700_DMA) {
> >> +		/* Max frame length is 1MB */
> >> +		lli->hw[OWL_DMADESC_FLEN] = len;
> >> +		/*
> >> +		 * On S700, word starts from offset 0x1C is shared between
> >> +		 * frame count and ctrlb, where first 12 bits are for frame
> >> +		 * count and rest of 20 bits are for ctrlb.
> >> +		 */
> >> +		lli->hw[OWL_DMADESC_CTRLB] = FCNT_VAL | ctrlb;
> >> +	} else {
> >> +		/*
> >> +		 * On S900, word starts from offset 0xC is shared between
> >> +		 * frame length (max frame length is 1MB) and frame count,
> >> +		 * where first 20 bits are for frame length and rest of
> >> +		 * 12 bits are for frame count.
> >> +		 */
> >> +		lli->hw[OWL_DMADESC_FLEN] = len | FCNT_VAL << 20;
> >> +		lli->hw[OWL_DMADESC_CTRLB] = ctrlb;
> > 
> > Unfortunately this wont scale, we will keep adding new conditions for
> > newer SoC's! So rather than this why not encode max frame length in
> > driver_data rather than S900_DMA/S700_DMA.. In future one can add values
> > for newer SoC and not code above logic again.
> 
> What newer SoCs? I don't think we should try to guess the future here.

In a patch for adding new SoC, quite ironical I would say!

> We can always introduce further abstractions later, once we actually
> *know* what we are looking at.

Rather if we know we are adding abstractions, why not add in a way that
makes it scale better rather than rework again

> Besides, I don't understand what you are after. The max frame length is
> 1MB in both cases, it's just a matter of where to put FCNT_VAL, either
> in FLEN or in CTRLB. And having an extra flag for that in driver data
> sounds a bit over the top at the moment.

Maybe, maybe not. I would rather make it support N SoC when adding
support for second one rather than keep adding everytime a new SoC is
added...

-- 
~Vinod