Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 19 Apr 2022 17:18:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject:     Re: [PATCH v8 0/4] Determine the number of DMA channels by 'dma-channels' property
In-Reply-To: <CANXhq0r15Z9NZj+xr7K_2Tt5VbK2r4+f7Fpg-f9BY98ufgKxcw@mail.gmail.com>
CC:     vkoul@kernel.org, robh+dt@kernel.org,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, conor.dooley@microchip.com,
        geert@linux-m68k.org, bin.meng@windriver.com, green.wan@sifive.com,
        dmaengine@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
From:   Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>
To:     zong.li@sifive.com
Message-ID: <mhng-75e55594-c878-4fad-9ffc-dc552111208e@palmer-ri-x1c9>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (MHng)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 04:43:35 PDT (-0700), zong.li@sifive.com wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 6:48 PM Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 11-04-22, 10:51, Zong Li wrote:
>> > On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 9:13 PM Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On 28-03-22, 17:52, Zong Li wrote:
>> > > > The PDMA driver currently assumes there are four channels by default, it
>> > > > might cause the error if there is actually less than four channels.
>> > > > Change that by getting number of channel dynamically from device tree.
>> > > > For backwards-compatible, it uses the default value (i.e. 4) when there
>> > > > is no 'dma-channels' information in dts.
>> > >
>> > > Applied patch 1 & 4 to dmaengine-next, thanks
>> >
>> > Hi Vinod,
>> > Thanks for your help and review. For patch 2 and 3, does it mean that
>> > we should go through the riscv tree?
>>
>> Yes
>>
>
> Hi Palmer,
> Could you please help me to pick up the patch 2 and 3. Thanks :)

Sorry about that, I forgot about this one.  I just put them on for-next, 
there was a minor merge conflict but it looks pretty simple.

>
>> --
>> ~Vinod