> On Aug 2, 2017, at 10:25 PM, Koul, Vinod <vinod.koul@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 10:41:51AM +0530, Jiang, Dave wrote: >> >> >>>> On Aug 2, 2017, at 9:58 PM, Koul, Vinod <vinod.koul@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 02:13:56PM -0700, Dave Jiang wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 08/02/2017 02:10 PM, Sinan Kaya wrote: >>>>> On 8/2/2017 4:52 PM, Dave Jiang wrote: >>>>>>> Do we need a new API / new function, or new capability? >>>>>> Hmmm...you are right. I wonder if we need something like DMA_SG cap.... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Unfortunately, DMA_SG means something else. Maybe, we need DMA_MEMCPY_SG >>>>> to be similar with DMA_MEMSET_SG. >>>> >>>> I'm ok with that if Vinod is. >>> >>> So what exactly is the ask here, are you trying to do MEMCPY or SG or MEMSET >>> or all :). We should have done bitfields for this though... >> >> Add DMA_MEMCPY_SG to transaction type. > > Not MEMSET right, then why not use DMA_SG, DMA_SG is supposed for > scatterlist to scatterlist copy which is used to check for > device_prep_dma_sg() calls > Right. But we are doing flat buffer to/from scatterlist, not sg to sg. So we need something separate than what DMA_SG is used for. > -- > ~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
