Re: [GIT_PULL] SOC: TI Keystone Ring Accelerator driver for v5.6

[Vinod Koul]

Hi,

Add Peter

On 16-01-20, 21:05, santosh.shilimkar@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> On 1/16/20 4:03 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 12:07:39PM -0800, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> > > Its bit late for pull request, but if possible, please pull it to
> > > soc drivers tree.
> > > 
> > > The following changes since commit e42617b825f8073569da76dc4510bfa019b1c35a:
> > > 
> > >    Linux 5.5-rc1 (2019-12-08 14:57:55 -0800)
> > > 
> > > are available in the git repository at:
> > > 
> > >    git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ssantosh/linux-keystone.git tags/drivers_soc_for_5.6
> > > 
> > > for you to fetch changes up to 3277e8aa2504d97e022ecb9777d784ac1a439d36:
> > > 
> > >    soc: ti: k3: add navss ringacc driver (2020-01-15 10:07:27 -0800)
> > > 
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > > SOC: TI Keystone Ring Accelerator driver
> > > 
> > > The Ring Accelerator (RINGACC or RA) provides hardware acceleration to
> > > enable straightforward passing of work between a producer and a consumer.
> > > There is one RINGACC module per NAVSS on TI AM65x SoCs.
> > 
> > This driver doesn't seem to have exported symbols, and no in-kernel
> > users. So how will it be used?
> > 
> > Usually we ask to hold off until the consuming side/drivers are also ready.
> > 
> The other patches getting merged via Vinod's tree. The combined series
> is split into couple of series. Vinod is going to pull this branch
> and apply rest of the patchset. And then couple of additional consumer
> drivers will get posted.

Yeah the TI driver series has been reviewed and was 'waiting' for
dependency to be resolved before I could apply them
FWIW here is the series under consideration: https://lore.kernel.org/dmaengine/20191223110458.30766-1-peter.ujfalusi@xxxxxx/

> > Also, is there a reason this is under drivers/soc/ instead of somewhere more
> > suitable in the drivers subsystem? It's not "soc glue code" in the same way as
> > drivers/soc was intended originally.
> > 
> These kind of SOC IP drivers, we put into drivers/soc/ because of lack
> of specific subsystem where they fit in. Navigator was also similar example.
> 
> Regards,
> Santosh

-- 
~Vinod