On 08/02/2014 05:13 PM, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 08:09:17PM +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
On 08/01/2014 07:15 PM, Vinod Koul wrote:
On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 10:57:07AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 10:00:10AM +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
On 07/31/2014 07:37 PM, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 06:54:11PM +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
On 07/31/2014 06:13 PM, Maxime Ripard wrote:
[...]
From what you're saying, and judging from the drivers that already
implement it, can't it be moved directly to the framework itself ?
What exactly do you mean by moving it directly to the framework? The
slave_caps API is part of the DMAengine framework.
Not its implementation, which is defined by each and every driver,
while the behaviour of device_slave_caps is rather generic.
Do you mean something like adding a dma_slave_caps struct field to
the DMA channel that gets initialized when the channel is created
and then remove the callback? That makes some sense.
I was rather thinking into something like:
- Splitting device_control into independant functions
I like this part :)
I started working on this a while ago by splitting out the
slave_config functionality into its own callback. Haven't managed to
finalize it since it wasn't really top priority.
He, I've done the same yesterday... Do you plan on submitting it soon,
or should I keep going?
The plan was to submit it eventually. But if you already did it as well, go
for it.
- Lars
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dmaengine" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
