On 17-07-21, 16:48, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 7/17/21 4:34 PM, Vinod Koul wrote: > > On 17-07-21, 14:01, Marek Vasut wrote: > > > On 7/17/21 1:36 PM, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > > On 16-07-21, 20:22, Marek Vasut wrote: > > > > > Various DMA users call the dmaengine_slave_config() and expect it to > > > > > succeed, but that can only succeed if .device_config is implemented. > > > > > Add empty device_config function rather than patching all the places > > > > > which use dmaengine_slave_config(). > > > > > > > > .device_config is optional, Yes the dmaengine_slave_config() will check > > > > and return error... > > > > > > > > I think it would make sense to handle this in caller... (ignore > > > > ENOSYS..) rather than add a dummy one > > > > > > That's what I was trying to avoid -- patching all the places in kernel which > > > might fail. Why handle it in caller ? > > > > And how many places would that be..? The xilinx driver using xilinx > > dma right> > > git grep indicates around 170 matches on dmaengine_slave_config. In my case, > it is generic PCM DMA in sound/soc/soc-generic-dmaengine-pcm.c . Okay lets have this. Looks like kbuild-bot is not happy, can you fix that and send update -- ~Vinod
