On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 02:05:38PM +0000, Flavio Suligoi wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> > While this isn't going to hurt anything and might actually help so it's
> > fine doesn't this also suggest that there's an issue with deferred probe
> > going on as well?
> I think that the problem could be related to how the DMA channel is requested.
> At the moment the function used are:
> pxa2xx_spi_dma_setup --> dma_request_slave_channel_compat -->
> --> __dma_request_slave_channel_compat --> dma_request_slave_channel -->
> --> dma_request_chan
> Actually the final function "dma_request_chan" return
> the channel number or "-EPROBE_DEFER" if it's not ready.
> But this information ("-EPROBE_DEFER") is lost in the penultimate function
> "dma_request_slave_channel", which return only the chann, if all is ok, or
> NULL, in case of errors.
> So the deferral mechanism is not used.
Right, yes - that analysis seems correct. The interfaces seem a bit
weird here but fixing them looks like the most complete and robust fix.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
