Hi Vinod, Thanks for your review, please see my comments inline. Best Regards, Yuan Yao > -----Original Message----- > From: Vinod Koul [mailto:vinod.koul@xxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Monday, October 05, 2015 10:37 PM > To: Yuan Yao-B46683 <yao.yuan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: shawn.guo@xxxxxxxxxx; dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx; > dmaengine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm- > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dma: Add Freescale qDMA engine driver support > > On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 01:53:52PM +0800, Yuan Yao wrote: > > > +Examples: > > + > > + qdma: qdma@8390000 { > > + compatible = "fsl,ls-qdma"; > > + reg = <0x0 0x8380000 0x0 0x20000>; > > + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 170 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>, > > + <GIC_SPI 185 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; > > + interrupt-names = "qdma-tx", "qdma-err"; > > + big-endian; > > + channels = <1>; > > + }; > > Binding should be a separate patch [Yuan Yao] Ok, Thanks. > > > +FREESCALE qDMA DRIVER > > +M: Yuan Yao <yao.yuan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > +L: linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > not dmaengine ML ? [Yuan Yao] Ok, Thanks. > > > > +config FSL_QDMA > > + tristate "Freescale qDMA engine support" > > + select DMA_ENGINE > > + select DMA_VIRTUAL_CHANNELS > > No depends on arch, can it work on x86? [Yuan Yao] Ok, Thanks. > > > +static int fsl_qdma_alloc_chan_resources(struct dma_chan *chan) { > > + struct fsl_qdma_chan *fsl_chan = to_fsl_qdma_chan(chan); > > + > > + fsl_chan->desc = NULL; > > + return 0; > > +} > > why do you need this it seems to do nothing [Yuan Yao] I will remove it. > > > +static struct fsl_qdma_desc *fsl_qdma_alloc_desc(struct fsl_qdma_chan > > +*fsl_chan) { > > + struct fsl_qdma_desc *fsl_desc; > > + > > + fsl_desc = kzalloc(sizeof(*fsl_desc), GFP_NOWAIT); > > + > > empty line here is not required > > > + if (!fsl_desc) > > + return NULL; > > + > > + fsl_desc->qchan = fsl_chan; > > + > > + return fsl_desc; > > why not return fsl_desc->qchan ; > [Yuan Yao] I still need some data in fsl_desc. So I have to return fsl_desc here. > > > + dma_cap_set(DMA_PRIVATE, fsl_qdma->dma_dev.cap_mask); > > + dma_cap_set(DMA_SLAVE, fsl_qdma->dma_dev.cap_mask); > > + dma_cap_set(DMA_MEMCPY, fsl_qdma->dma_dev.cap_mask); > > + > > + fsl_qdma->dma_dev.dev = &pdev->dev; > > + fsl_qdma->dma_dev.device_alloc_chan_resources > > + = fsl_qdma_alloc_chan_resources; > > + fsl_qdma->dma_dev.device_free_chan_resources > > + = fsl_qdma_free_chan_resources; > > + fsl_qdma->dma_dev.device_tx_status = fsl_qdma_tx_status; > > + fsl_qdma->dma_dev.device_prep_dma_memcpy = > fsl_qdma_prep_memcpy; > > + fsl_qdma->dma_dev.device_issue_pending = > fsl_qdma_issue_pending; > > You claim DMA_SLAVE but no prep_ for that? > [Yuan Yao] It's a mistake. I will remove it.\ > > + > > +static int __init fsl_qdma_init(void) { > > + return platform_driver_register(&fsl_qdma_driver); > > +} > > +subsys_initcall(fsl_qdma_init); > why subsys_init? > [Yuan Yao] For a preventive, some driver base on DMA, QDMA have to initialize earlier than them. Even now there is no kernel driver base on QDMA, But I still think the subsys_init is better. > -- > ~Vinod -- 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
