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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230418052902.1336866-1-joychakr@google.com> <20230418052902.1336866-5-joychakr@google.com>
 <ZD5JC7BdN1usn6Kd@smile.fi.intel.com> <CAOSNQF2sXHFCx9ZfrtfmxHfKrAE0XGP8SRvW6wyYco+FKSPmDw@mail.gmail.com>
 <ZD/VO1cuBYGCP4O2@smile.fi.intel.com> <CAOSNQF1wf3m+YTmh5qQWCM6+x3j2whvG6F=dW6Hd7zW0Y+E_1g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOSNQF1wf3m+YTmh5qQWCM6+x3j2whvG6F=dW6Hd7zW0Y+E_1g@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Joy Chakraborty <joychakr@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 19 Apr 2023 20:25:46 +0530
Message-ID: <CAOSNQF0ATN5AdJsgQ4CzxyD_eOFyjbd9p5j3JcV7+GxQa1bnog@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 4/5] spi: dw: Add DMA address widths capability check
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>
Cc:     Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@gmail.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, manugautam@google.com,
        rohitner@google.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 6:18=E2=80=AFPM Joy Chakraborty <joychakr@google.co=
m> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 5:19=E2=80=AFPM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 11:18:25AM +0530, Joy Chakraborty wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 1:08=E2=80=AFPM Andy Shevchenko
> > > <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 05:29:01AM +0000, Joy Chakraborty wrote:
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > > > +     /*
> > > > > +      * Assuming both channels belong to the same DMA controller=
 hence the
> > > > > +      * address width capabilities most likely would be the same=
.
> > > > > +      */
> > > >
> > > > I had a small comment on this In v6 thread.
> > >
> > > Sure,
> > >
> > > Your comment in V6 thread:
> > > "
> > > I would add something to explain the side of these address width, lik=
e
> > >
> > >          * Assuming both channels belong to the same DMA controller h=
ence
> > >          * the peripheral side address width capabilities most likely=
 would
> > >          * be the same.
> > > "
> > >
> > > I do not think the address width capabilities are dependent on the
> > > side of generation like memory or peripheral.
> >
> > Yes, they are independent. Memory could do with 4 bytes, while peripher=
al with
> > 1 byte and so on.
> >
> > > From what I understand,
> > > address width capabilities are solely dependent on the transaction
> > > generation capability of the DMA controller towards the system bus.
> >
> > What do you mean by a SB in the above? Memory? Peripheral?
>
> By system bus I mean anything that is connecting the Memory, DMA and
> the peripheral.
> Something like :
>
>           +-----------+          +-------------------+
>           |               |           |                        |
>           |   DMA    |           | PERIPHERAL |
>           |               |           |                         |
>           +----^-+---+          +-----+--^---------+
>         *** -->| |                         |    |
>                   | |                         |    |
> <------------+-v--------------------v---+------------->
>                     SYSTEM BUS
> <---------------------+--^----------------------------->
>                             |   |
>                             |   |
>                      +----v--+-----+
>                      |                   |
>                      |  MEMORY |
>                      |                   |
>                      +--------------+
> *** : Address width capabilities should be the capability of the DMA
> to generate transactions to the system bus on the marked interface
> irrespective of whether it is destined for Peripheral or memory is
> what I understand.
>
Looks like the diagram did not come correctly, repasting:
        +----------+          +---------------+
        |          |          |               |
        |   DMA    |          |  PERIPHERAL   |
        |          |          |               |
        +----^-+---+          +-----+--^------+
       ***-->| |                    |  |
             | |                    |  |
             | |                    |  |
<------------+-v--------------------v--+--------------->
                    SYSTEM BUS
<---------------------+--^----------------------------->
                      |  |
                      |  |
                      |  |
                 +----v--+-----+
                 |   MEMORY    |
                 |             |
                 +-------------+

> >
> > > What we intend to highlight here is the assumption that both tx and r=
x
> > > channel would belong to the same DMA controller hence the transaction
> > > generation capabilities would be the same both for read and write
> > > (e.g. if the DMA controller is able to generate 32 bit sized reads
> > > then it should also be able to generate 32 bit sized writes).
> > > With this assumption we are doing a bitwise and of both tx and rx cap=
abilities.
> > >
> > > Please let me know if you think otherwise.
> >
> > --
> > With Best Regards,
> > Andy Shevchenko
> >
> >