> -----Original Message----- > From: Christoph Hellwig [mailto:hch@xxxxxx] > Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2018 13:05 > > +int amba_dma_configure(struct device *dev) > > +{ > > + enum dev_dma_attr attr; > > + int ret = 0; > > + > > + if (dev->of_node) { > > + ret = of_dma_configure(dev, dev->of_node); > > + } else if (has_acpi_companion(dev)) { > > + attr = acpi_get_dma_attr(to_acpi_device_node(dev->fwnode)); > > + if (attr != DEV_DMA_NOT_SUPPORTED) > > + ret = acpi_dma_configure(dev, attr); > > + } > > + > > + return ret; > > This code sniplet is duplicated so many times that I think we should > just have some sort of dma_common_configure() for it that the various > busses can use. Agree. There is no good point in duplicating the code. So this new API will be part of 'drivers/base/dma-mapping.c' file? > > > +void amba_dma_deconfigure(struct device *dev) > > +{ > > + of_dma_deconfigure(dev); > > + acpi_dma_deconfigure(dev); > > +} > > As mention in my previous reply I think we don't even need a deconfigure > callback at this point - just remove the ACPI and OF wrappers and > clear the dma ops. > > Also in this series we should replace the force_dma flag by use of the > proper method, e.g. give a force parameter to of_dma_configure and the > new dma_common_configure helper that the busses that want it can set. I am more inclined to what Robin states in other mail to keep symmetry. i.e. to keep dma_configure() and dma_deconfigure() and call dev->bus->dma_configure from dma_configure(). Is this okay? Thanks, Nipun
