Re: [PATCH v7 01/10] ARM: davinci: move private EDMA API to arm/common

[Sergei Shtylyov]

Hello.

On 02-02-2013 22:07, Matt Porter wrote:

> > > > > > > Move mach-davinci/dma.c to common/edma.c so it can be used
> > > > > > > by OMAP (specifically AM33xx) as well.

> > > > > > I think this should rather go to drivers/dma/?

> > > > > No, this is the private EDMA API. It's the analogous thing to
> > > > > the private OMAP dma API that is in plat-omap/dma.c. The actual
> > > > > dmaengine driver is in drivers/dma/edma.c as a wrapper around
> > > > > this...same way OMAP DMA engine conversion is being done.

> > > >     Keeps me wondering why we couldn't have the same with CPPI 4.1 when I proposed
> > > > that, instead of waiting indefinitely for TI to convert it to drivers/dma/
> > > > directly. We could have working MUSB DMA on OMAP-L1x/Sitara all this time... Sigh.

> > > That is a shame. Yeah, I've pointed out that I was doing this exactly
> > > the same way as was acceptable for the OMAP DMA conversion since it was
> > > in RFC. The reasons are sound since in both cases, we have many drivers
> > > to convert that need to continue using the private DMA APIs.

> >      In case of CPPI 4.1, we'd only have to convert MUSB DMA driver. Other
> > in-tree CPPI 4.1 having SoCs don't use it for anything but MUSB -- it even is
> > sub-block of their MUSB device, AFAIK (I maybe wrong about Sitaras -- I don't
> > know them well).

> Well, it's pretty clear to me now that there's good reason for it not
> landing in arch/arm/ so the obvious path is to do the dmaengine
> conversion and put it in drivers/dma/ if it's really a generic dma engine.
> I'm not sure why you express concern over the dma engine api not fitting
> with CPPI 4.1?

   It's not a DMA controller only, it's 3 distinct devices, with the DMA 
controller being one among them and using another one, the queue manager, as 
some sort of proxy. The third device doesn't exist on OMAP-L1x SoCs -- it's 
the buffer manager.

> If it doesn't work, work with Vinod to fix the api. It's
> expected, I'm working on dmaengine API changes right now to deal with a
> limitation of EDMA that needs to be abstracted.

   Sorry, now it's TI's task. I no longer have time to work on this (my 
internal project to push OMAP-L1x support upstream has expired at Sep 2010) 
and my future in MV is very uncertain at this moment. Most probably I'll leave 
it (or be forced to leave).

> As pointed out, edma.c is already here in arch/arm/, so moving it doesn't
> add something new. It does let us regression test all platforms that use it
> (both Davinci and AM33xx) as I go through the conversion process.

   Could have been the same with CPPI 4.1 in theory if it was added to 
mach-davinci/ back in 2009... we'd then only have to move it. EDMA code is 
much older of course, so it's probably more justified.

> -Matt

WBR, Sergei

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/