On Thursday 10 September 2015 11:37:38 Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> +static u64 da8xx_edma0_dmamask = DMA_BIT_MASK(32);
> +
> static struct platform_device da8xx_edma0_device = {
> .name = "edma",
> .id = 0,
> .dev = {
> .platform_data = &da8xx_edma0_pdata,
> + .dma_mask = &da8xx_edma0_dmamask,
> + .coherent_dma_mask = DMA_BIT_MASK(32),
> },
> .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(da8xx_edma0_resources),
> .resource = da8xx_edma0_resources,
> };
While this is technically correct for all I can tell, could you
convert it to use __initconst platform_device_info and
platform_device_register_full() instead?
statically declaring platform_devices has been frowned upon for a long
time (even though a lot of arm platforms still do it), and statically
declaring the dma mask seems worse to me (and yes, I realize we also
do that elsewhere).
Arnd
--
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
