On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 01:47:45PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> Having them declared is redundant since each struct dw_dma_chan has
> the same structure embedded and the structure from the passed dma_chan
> private pointer will be copied there as a result of the next calls
> chain:
> dma_request_channel() -> find_candidate() -> dma_chan_get() ->
> device_alloc_chan_resources() = dwc_alloc_chan_resources() ->
> dw_dma_filter().
> So just remove the static dw_dma_chan structures and use a locally
> declared data instance with dst_id/src_id set to the same values as
> the static copies used to have.
...
> -static struct dw_dma_slave mid_dma_tx = { .dst_id = 1 };
> -static struct dw_dma_slave mid_dma_rx = { .src_id = 0 };
> + struct dw_dma_slave slave = {0};
I really would like to leave them separated and as in the original form, i.e.
struct dw_dma_slave tx = { .dst_id = 1 };
struct dw_dma_slave rx = { .src_id = 0 };
those src and dst IDs are put in that form on purpose...
> + /* 1. Init rx channel (.src_id = 0, .dst_id = 0) */
...this comment adds a bit of confusion.
(Needs more time to parse and understand what IDs are in use)
> + slave.dma_dev = &dma_dev->dev;
> + dws->rxchan = dma_request_channel(mask, mid_spi_dma_chan_filter, &slave);
> + /* 2. Init tx channel (.src_id = 0, .dst_id = 1) */
Ditto.
P.S. Just a recommendation for the future: in all your patches try to be less
invasive where it's possible.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
