On 05.04.2022 14:09, Michael Walle wrote:
> Am 2022-04-05 12:02, schrieb Codrin.Ciubotariu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx:
>> On 05.04.2022 12:38, Michael Walle wrote:
>>> Am 2022-04-05 11:23, schrieb Codrin.Ciubotariu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx:
>>>>> + if (dev->use_dma) {
>>>>> + dma_buf = i2c_get_dma_safe_msg_buf(m_start, 1);
>>>>
>>>> If you want, you could just dev->buf = i2c_get_dma_safe...
>>>
>>> But where is the error handling in that case? dev->buf will
>>> be NULL, which is eventually passed to dma_map_single().
>>>
>>> Also, I need the dma_buf for the i2c_put_dma_safe_msg_buf()
>>> call anyway, because dev->buf will be modified during
>>> processing.
>>
>> You still:
>> if (!dev->buf) {
>> ret = -ENOMEM;
>> goto out;
>> }
>>
>> So, at91_do_twi_transfer()/dma_map_single() will not be called.
>
> Ahh, I misunderstood you. Yes, but as I said, I need the dma_buf
> temporary variable anyway, because dev->buf is modified, eg. see
> at91_twi_read_data_dma_callback().
at91_twi_read_data_dma_callback() is called as callback if
dma_async_issue_pending(dma->chan_rx) is called.
dma_async_issue_pending(dma->chan_rx) is called on
at91_twi_read_data_dma(), which is called in at91_do_twi_transfer(),
which we decided above to skip in case of error.
