On 09/27/2013 04:04 AM, Sekhar Nori wrote: > On 9/27/2013 5:58 AM, Joel Fernandes wrote: >> On 09/26/2013 06:13 PM, Olof Johansson wrote: >>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 2:55 PM, Joel Fernandes <joelf@xxxxxx> wrote: >>>> HWMOD removal for MMC is breaking edma_start as the events are being manually >>>> triggered due to unused channel list not being clear. >>>> >>>> The above issue is fixed by reading the "dmas" property from the DT node if it >>>> exists and clearing the bits in the unused channel list if the dma controller >>>> used by any device is EDMA. For this purpose we use the of_* helpers to parse >>>> the arguments in the dmas phandle list. >>>> >>>> Also introduced is a minor clean up of a checkpatch error in old code. >>>> >>>> Reviewed-by: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@xxxxxx> >>>> Reported-by: Balaji T K <balajitk@xxxxxx> >>>> Cc: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@xxxxxx> >>>> Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> Cc: Olof Johansson <olof@xxxxxxxxx> >>>> Cc: Nishanth Menon <nm@xxxxxx> >>>> Cc: Pantel Antoniou <panto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> Cc: Jason Kridner <jkridner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> Cc: Koen Kooi <koen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes <joelf@xxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> Just resending this patch after discussing with Sekhar and Olof. >>> >>> Actually, the patch you talked to me about was v3 of this. It seems >>> that you have reposted v6 but labelled it v3. This is very confusing. >> >> Sorry about this. :-( This is indeed v6. >> >>>> AM335x is being booted by many users such as the beaglebone community. DT is >>>> the only boot method available for all these users. EDMA is required for the >>>> operation for many common peripherals in AM335x SoC such as McASP, MMC and >>>> Crypto. >>>> >>>> Although EDMA DT nodes are going in only for 3.13, in reality the kernel has >>>> been used for more than a year with EDMA code and out of tree EDMA DTS patches. >>>> Hence though the DT nodes are still not in mainline, this patch can be still be >>>> considered a critical fix as such and it would be great if it could be included >>>> in 3.12-rc release. Thanks. >>> >>> This is really the root of this problem. If you sit on code out of >>> tree for a year, and something breaks that we couldn't even have >>> detected since we didn't have the out-of-tree pieces. We'll help you >>> the first few times (such as now) but we will eventually stop caring. >> >> When I started looking at EDMA in June, I noticed that a lot had already been >> merged. EDMA DMA Engine driver itself was merged last year, no worries there. >> but the long pending list of fixes to be made to the driver had to written and >> rewritten multiple times which took a long time. >> >> Due to this, the EDMA device tree entries could not be merged in fear that doing >> so would cause problems such as MMC/SD corruption etc. >> >>> If I was in a worse mood, then I'd just say that since your users >>> already has to have out-of-tree code to even use this functionality, >>> they could just add this fix on top of that stack of patches. But I'm >>> in a slightly better mood than that and I'll pick it up this time. :) >> >> Thank you! :) >> >>>> More details about why this broke an existing feature folks were using: >>>> Previously the DMA resources for platform devices were being populated through >>>> HWMOD, however with the recent clean ups with HWMOD, this data has been moved >>>> to Device tree. The EDMA code though is not aware of this so it fails to fetch >>>> the DMA resources correctly which it needs to prepare the unused channel list >>>> (basically doesn't properly clear the channels that are in use, in the unused >>>> list). >>> >>> So that we can learn for next time: What should we (as in us >>> maintainers and you TI) have done differently to avoid this? >> >> I think a little on both sides can be improved. > > Since we are in lessons learnt mode, I think as developers we need to > learn to prioritize fixes over other features we are working on. I went > back to the chronology of this patch series. Sure, I agree with this. Will definitely work on it. > > 22nd July 2013: v2 posted > 29th July 2013: Discussion on whether the patch can wait till *v3.12* > merge window. > 29th July 2013: comments given on v2 > 22nd Aug 2013: Pull request's sent by Sekhar for v3.12 > 24th Aug 2013: another v2 posted (all comments given earlier not > addressed, received some comments on build warnings) > 27th Aug 2013: another v3 posted (all comments given on 29th July not > addressed) > 10th Sept 2013: another v3 posted (all comments given on 29th July not > addressed) > [some discussion on comments and why this cannot wait until v3.13] > 17th Sept 2013: Final version ready for merge posted. > 26th Sept 2013: Another v3 posted, this time for Olof to send into > v3.12-rc > > See, early on, the patch was actually in consideration for v3.12 merge. > The barrier of entry into -rc cycle is pretty high. So if you have an > opportunity to hit a merge window, utilize that by prioritizing this > work over anything else you may be doing. > > I know you got busy with adding support for SG lists and all, but > clearly this patch is critical in your mind. Plus the comments were not > tough to fix. There is a need to keep looking at what provides the best > return on time invested. Yes, but we are not referring to this particular patch at all. Olof was asking about the code that was not been merged and/or the reasons things are not working. I was just responding to that. But thanks for the advice, will def keep it in mind. Regards, -Joel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
