On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wednesday 18 November 2015 16:41:35 Peter Ujfalusi wrote: >> On 11/18/2015 04:29 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> > On Wednesday 18 November 2015 16:21:26 Peter Ujfalusi wrote: >> >> 2. non slave channel requests, where only the functionality matters, like >> >> memcpy, interleaved, memset, etc. >> >> We could have a simple: >> >> dma_request_channel(mask); >> >> >> >> But looking at the drivers using dmaengine legacy dma_request_channel() API: >> >> Some sets DMA_INTERRUPT or DMA_PRIVATE or DMA_SG along with DMA_SLAVE: >> >> drivers/misc/carma/carma-fpga.c DMA_INTERRUPT|DMA_SLAVE|DMA_SG >> >> drivers/misc/carma/carma-fpga-program.c DMA_MEMCPY|DMA_SLAVE|DMA_SG >> >> drivers/media/platform/soc_camera/mx3_camera.c DMA_SLAVE|DMA_PRIVATE >> >> sound/soc/intel/common/sst-firmware.c DMA_SLAVE|DMA_MEMCPY >> >> >> >> as examples. >> >> Not sure how valid are these... > > I just had a look myself. carma has been removed fortunately in linux-next, > so we don't have to worry about that any more. > > I assume that the sst-firmware.c case is a mistake, it should just use a > plain DMA_SLAVE and not DMA_MEMCPY. Other way around. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko -- 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
