On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 at 08:08:28 AM, Yao Yuan wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 at 02:27:46 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 at 06:56:34 AM, Yao Yuan wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 at 11:43:27 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 at 04:08:27 AM, Yao Yuan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > > > > + i2c_imx->use_dma = false;
> > > > > > > + } else if (i2c_imx_dma_request(i2c_imx,
> > > > > > > +(dma_addr_t)phy_addr))
> > > >
> > > > {
> > > >
> > > > > > > + dev_info(&pdev->dev,
> > > > > > > + "can't request dma chan, faild use dma.
> >
> > \n");
> >
> > > > > > > + i2c_imx->use_dma = false;
> > > > > > > + } else {
> > > > > > > + i2c_imx->use_dma = true;
> > > > > > > + }
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Can you not just check if i2c_imx->dma is valid pointer or NULL
> > > >
> > > > pointer ?
> > > >
> > > > > > Then you won't need a separate variable, for this purpose ...
> >
> > right ?
> >
> > > > > Sorry and I think what I know is just to check whether it is NULL.
> > > > > Then for the second question, maybe there are some other ways, But
> > > > > I think it is more tidy and easier understanding for using a
> > > > > separate variable, for this purpose.
> > > >
> > > > You are just wasting space and duplicating data, unless I am wrong.
> > >
> > > Well, Do you have a better idea? Although I think it's necessary.
> >
> > I think we disconnected here, sorry. Why can you not use (i2c_imx->dma !=
> > NULL) instead of (i2c_imx->use_dma == true) please ?
>
> But there are two judge conditions. But only the "i2c_imx->dma", but also
> whether "i2c_imx_dma_request" success.
>
> "i2c_imx->use_dma == true" be equivalent to "i2c_imx->dma != NULL &&
> !i2c_imx_dma_request()"
+ /* Init DMA config if support*/
+ i2c_imx->dma = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(struct imx_i2c_dma),
+ GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!i2c_imx->dma) {
+ dev_info(&pdev->dev,
+ "can't allocate dma struct faild use dma.\n");
+ i2c_imx->use_dma = false;
+ } else if (i2c_imx_dma_request(i2c_imx, (dma_addr_t)phy_addr)) {
+ dev_info(&pdev->dev,
+ "can't request dma chan, faild use dma.\n");
+ i2c_imx->use_dma = false;
+ } else {
+ i2c_imx->use_dma = true;
+ }
OK, looking at this one more time, why don't you wrap the allocation of i2c_imx-
>dma into i2c_imx_dma_request() ? Even better, you can allocate *dma as a local
variable in i2c_imx_dma_request() and then assign it into i2c_imx->dma only at
the end of the i2c_imx_dma_request() function , at the point where you are sure
nothing failed. Then you can check i2c_imx->dma != NULL throughout the code to
check if the DMA is available, no ?
Shawn, Wolfram, am I talking nonsense or am I just not connecting ?
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
