On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 6:58 PM Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 04:51:43PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 03:12:28PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote: > > > > > Well, for me both solutions are equal except mine consumes less stack memory. > > > The only reason why your solution might be better is that if DW DMA driver or > > > the DMA engine subsystem changed the dw_dma_slave structure instance passed to > > > the dma_request_channel() method, which non of them do. So I'll leave this for > > > Mark to decide. Mark, could you give us your final word about this? > > > > Honestly I'm struggling to care either way. I guess saving a bit of > > stack is potentially useful. > > Settled then. With whom? > Let's leave the patch as is. Mark, should I send a partial revert afterwards in this case? I'm not fully satisfied with it. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
