Hi Dan & Vinod, I have sent out the v4 of this patch and not received any further feedback yet. This patch looks ruled out from the patchwork. https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-dmaengine/list/?page=2 So do you know what happened to this patch? Thanks, Xuelin Shi -----Original Message----- From: Shi Xuelin-B29237 Sent: 2014年4月15日 11:08 To: 'Dan Williams' Cc: Koul, Vinod; andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx; dmaengine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linuxppc-dev; Rai Harninder-B01044; Burmi Naveen-B16502 Subject: RE: [PATCH v3] dmaengine: driver support for FSL RaidEngine device. Yes, "depend on !ASYNC_TX_CHANNEL_SWITCH" is better since fsldma selects this condition. Thanks, Xuelin Shi -----Original Message----- From: Dan Williams [mailto:dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: 2014年4月15日 8:30 To: Shi Xuelin-B29237 Cc: Koul, Vinod; andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx; dmaengine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linuxppc-dev; Rai Harninder-B01044; Burmi Naveen-B16502 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] dmaengine: driver support for FSL RaidEngine device. On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 7:48 PM, Xuelin Shi <xuelin.shi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Dan, > > fsl dma device and fsl raid device are two differenct devices that > both provide async_memcpy capability, so I use !FSL_DMA to disable the fsl dma device. > > That's to say, either select fsldma device, either fsl raid device. > Right, but that's not what your proposed Kconfig dependency line does. You want something like "depends on FSL_SOC && !(FSL_DMA || FSL_DMA=m)" However, the more problematic option is ASYNC_TX_CHANNEL_SWITCH. That option is problematic for RAID, so I propose "depend on !ASYNC_TX_CHANNEL_SWITCH" since that addresses both problems. ?韬{.n?????%??檩??w?{.n???Ё?撖)?骅w* jg????????G??⒏ ⒎?:+v???????? ????＂??????
