On 09-09-19, 09:30, Peter Ujfalusi wrote: > >> or domain-dma-controller? > > > > I feel dma-domain-controller sounds fine as we are defining domains for > > dmaengine. Another thought which comes here is that why not extend this to > > slave as well and define dma-domain-controller for them as use that for > > filtering, that is what we really need along with slave id in case a > > specific channel is to be used by a peripheral > > > > Thoughts..? > > I have thought about this, we should be able to drop the phandle to the > dma controller from the slave binding just fine. > > However we have the dma routers for the slave channels and there is no > clear way to handle them. > They are not needed for non slave channels as there is no trigger to > route. In DRA7 for example we have an event router for EDMA and another > one for sDMA. If a slave device is to be serviced by EDMA, the EDMA > event router needs to be specified, for sDMA clients should use the sDMA > event router. So you have dma, xbar and client? And you need to use a specfic xbar, did i get that right? > In DRA7 case we don't really have DMA controllers for domains, but we > use the DMA which can service the peripheral better (sDMA is better to > be used for UART, but can not be used for McASP for example) > > Then we have the other type of DMA router for daVinci/am33xx/am43xx > where the crossbar is not for the whole EDMA controller like in DRA7, > but we have small crossbars for some channels. > > Other vendors have their own dma router topology.. > > Too many variables to handle the cases without gotchas, which would need > heavy churn in the core or in drivers. -- ~Vinod
