On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 03:54:27PM +0100, Jon Hunter wrote: > >>>>> I can understand that you wish to consolidate the APIs for requesting a > >>>>> channel, but it seems to me that you still need to have an API that DMA > >>>>> controller drivers can call where they can pass their dma_device > >>>>> structure to ensure you get a channel for the appropriate DMA controller. > >>> > >>> Yes but the idea was that xlate will help you to get the right channel. The > >>> whole dmaengine property was supposed to help you with that > >> > >> Well it depends on the DMA controller. In the case of tegra the xlate > >> helps you extract the slave request ID for a given device. However, > >> because any channel can be used with any slave request ID, we don't care > >> about the exact channel. So we request any available channel for the DMA > >> controller in question and program it with the slave request we got from > >> the xlate. > > > > Right. the cleanup was supposed to reduce the number of interfaces > > that a slave driver can call and consolidate them as much as possible > > into dma_request_chan(), but we still need dma_get_any_slave_channel() > > as an interface for the dmaengine masters as you said. > > OK, great. > > Vinod, are you ok with this then? Any other items to fix-up? Okay from me. -- ~Vinod -- 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
