Hi Vinod, On 7/24/2016 2:42 AM, Vinod Koul wrote: > On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 12:09:37AM +0530, Sinan Kaya wrote: > >> @@ -567,6 +578,98 @@ static int hidma_create_sysfs_entry(struct hidma_dev *dev, char *name, >> return device_create_file(dev->ddev.dev, attrs); >> } >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_MSI_IRQ_DOMAIN > > This can be true on machine with your older HW, so I would be bit more > careful here.. Correct, I tested the patch with new and old HW. The old HW won't attempt calling this function since msi flag will be false. > >> + if (rc) >> + dev_warn(&pdev->dev, >> + "failed to request MSI irq, falling back to wired IRQ\n"); >> + return rc; >> +#else >> + return -EINVAL; > > -EINVAL doesnt sound apt here.. What should I use? -ENOENT ? > >> + struct acpi_device *adev = ACPI_COMPANION(dev); >> + const char *of_compat; >> + int ret; >> + >> + if (!adev || acpi_disabled) { >> + ret = device_property_read_string(dev, "compatible", >> + &of_compat); >> + if (ret) >> + return false; >> + >> + ret = strcmp(of_compat, "qcom,hidma-1.1"); >> + } else { >> + ret = strcmp(acpi_device_hid(adev), "QCOM8062"); > > Okay if you ahve a device ID then why do we need new binding? This device as > you said implies the support for MSI interrupts. Yes, I do have a new device ID for platforms with MSI capability. Which new binding are you referring to? > > Thanks > Sinan -- Sinan Kaya Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project. -- 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