On 28/09/15 17:36, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 09/28/2015 08:57 AM, Jon Hunter wrote: >> >> On 25/09/15 16:47, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>> On Friday 25 September 2015 16:38:55 Jon Hunter wrote: >>>> On 25/09/15 16:17, Jon Hunter wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 25/09/15 16:03, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>>>>> On Friday 25 September 2015 15:56:40 Jon Hunter wrote: >>>>>>> + case DMA_MEM_TO_DEV: >>>>>>> + burst_size = fls(tdc->config.dst_maxburst); >>>>>>> + ch_regs->config = ADMA_CH_CONFIG_SRC_BUF(num_bufs >>>>>>> - 1); >>>>>>> + ch_regs->ctrl = >>>>>>> ADMA_CH_CTRL_XFER_DIR(ADMA_MEM_TO_AHUB) | >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> ADMA_CH_CTRL_TX_REQ(tdc->config.slave_id); >>>>>>> + ch_regs->src_addr = buf_addr; >>>>>>> + break; >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> + case DMA_DEV_TO_MEM: >>>>>>> + burst_size = fls(tdc->config.src_maxburst); >>>>>>> + ch_regs->config = ADMA_CH_CONFIG_TRG_BUF(num_bufs >>>>>>> - 1); >>>>>>> + ch_regs->ctrl = >>>>>>> ADMA_CH_CTRL_XFER_DIR(ADMA_AHUB_TO_MEM) | >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> ADMA_CH_CTRL_RX_REQ(tdc->config.slave_id); >>>>>>> + ch_regs->trg_addr = buf_addr; >>>>>>> + break; >>>>>> >>>>>> Do not use the 'slave_id' field here to identify the slave device, >>>>>> that >>>>>> concept is broken. Instead, put the slave identification into the >>>>>> dma specifier in DT and read it out in your xlate function. >>>>> >>>>> Why is it broken? >>>>> >>>>> What happens if I don't know the slave-id? In other words, the >>>>> slave-id >>>>> can be dynamically allocated and associated with a given slave. >>>> >>>> I guess thinking about it some more, the driver could assign an id >>>> itself to a given channel and I could avoid using slave_id here. There >>>> are 22 channels and 10 tx and 10 rx requests. >>> >>> This sounds roughly right. So you could pick the ch_regs->ctrl value >>> when you allocate the tegra_adma_chan structure, and then map it to >>> the slave in the xlate() function. >> >> Actually, what I mentioned about would not work as it is not the DMA >> that should assign the requests to the channel. >> >> I think that I have poorly described the hardware and how it works, so >> let me try and explain a bit more. >> >> From a hardware perspective it looks like the following ... >> >> memory <-> adma <-> adma-if <-> xbar <-> clients >> >> where: >> - memory is the system memory >> - adma is the dma controller >> - adma-if is the dma interface to a crossbar >> - xbar is the crossbar >> - clients are various audio interfaces, such as i2s, etc >> >> The adma-if is essentially a mux with 10 tx and 10 rx ports. Any of the >> 22 adma channels can be mapped to any of the 10 tx or rx ports. The >> request signal used by the adma is determined by which port it is >> configured to use. However, what makes this even more configurable is >> the xbar is also a mux that can route adma-if ports to the various >> clients. >> >> So potentially, you could use any adma channel and any port to route >> audio to any of the clients. However, the adma-if needs to know which >> adma channel is mapped to which port > > It does? I'm pretty sure it didn't in earlier chips; what changed? I *believe* that T210 is the first one to have the ADMA controller where as previous chips used the APB-DMA controller. Looking at the APB-DMA on T124 I can see that there is a fixed REQ_SEL value for each of the APBIF (equivalent of the ADMA-IF on T210). > For earlier chips, I believe all that's required is: > > When programming the DMA engine, you need to know which ADMA-IF is in > use, so the correct DMA request selector can be programmed into the DMA > engine for flow-control. > > ADMA-IF simply receives the data from DMA, and forwards it to the XBAR > tagged with the ADMA-IF's own ID. > > The XBAR programming selects which data source (ADMA-IF TX, I2S RX, ...) > each sink (ADMARX, I2S TX, ...) receives. Yes, exactly, this part sounds the same. However, just the ADMA itself allows for even more configuration. > Ideally, when an I2S controller needs to start transmitting data, it > should dynamically allocate an ADMA-IF, query it for its DMA slave > request ID, and then forward this information to the ASoC code that sets > up the DMA transfer. Agree. > In practice, this means that since any I2S module could use any ADMA-IF, > you probably need to list all DMA request selectors possible in the > I2S's DMA-related properties, so it can choose which one to use. Possibly, but really I think that the i2s only cares about the ADMA-IF and the hardware request used by the ADMA can be abstracted by the ADMA-IF. In other words, if you allocate an ADMA channel to work with a specific ADMA-IF, then let the ADMA-IF select the hardware request because as long as one is available, you don't care which. > Or perhaps the XBAR binding should list all the DMA requestors so that > each I2S node doesn't have to. Yes, however, I think that the ADMA-IF would make sense as it really cares about the mapping of hardware request to the ADMA-IF port. Cheers Jon -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
