On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 02:47:22PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 04:00:34PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > On 16-09-20, 16:34, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > From: Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@xxxxxxx>
> > > Andy reported that commit 6b41030fdc79 ("dmaengine: dmatest:
> > > Restore default for channel") broke his scripts for the case
> > > where "busy" channel is used for configuration with expectation
> > > that run command would do nothing (and return 0). Instead,
> > > behavior was (unintentionally) changed to treat such case as
> > > under-configuration and progress with defaults, i.e. run command
> > > would start a test with default setting for channel (which would
> > > use all channels).
> >
> > but a mis-configured channel returning success and doing nothing does
> > not look as a good behaviour, I agree it broke Andy's script but the
> > behaviour was not good to start with ;)
>
> Which used to be a previous behaviour. I don't understand what should I do here
> as after this patch (and even after the initial multi-channel support patch)
> the behaviour is like you desire.
Okay, I have dropped the part '(and return 0)' to avoid ambiguity.
> > > Restore original behavior with tracking status of channel setter
> > > so we can distinguish between misconfigured and under-configured
> > > cases in run command and act accordingly.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
