From: "Dan Williams" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
To: "Timur Tabi" <timur@freescale.com>
Cc: "Haavard Skinnemoen" <haavard.skinnemoen@atmel.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: dmaengine.c: question about device_alloc_chan_resources
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 16:00:40 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e9c3a7c20809201600s3862da7qaab4a917220778e9@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48D3B880.3070607@freescale.com>
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 7:34 AM, Timur Tabi <timur@freescale.com> wrote:
> Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
>
>> Yes, or maybe provide an interface for simply requesting a channel
>> without having to register any callbacks.
>
> I could use this feature. The sound drivers for our MPC8610 processor use DMA,
> but the drivers need to control the DMA hardware directly, so I can't use
> dmaengine. I would like to be able to just reserve the channels and program
> them as I see fit.
>
I think its a good idea especially since it would be best not to
needlessly proliferate client implementations with competing channel
allocation schemes. However it would need to be more descriptive
than:
struct dma_chan *dma_request_channel(dma_cap_mask_t request_mask);
Why:
1/ What if the requester initializes before a dmaengine device has
been registered? What if a device is never registered?
2/ What about platform specific concerns where dma_cap_mask_t is not
descriptive enough e.g. only one memcpy channel can address a certain
bus? Currently a client implementation can have some intelligence to
return DMA_DUP for channels that do not have the platform capability.
At the very least clients should be allowed to set an 'exclusive' bit
to prevent the channel from leaking elsewhere.
--
Dan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-09-20 23:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-09-16 21:30 Timur Tabi
2008-09-17 22:36 ` Dan Williams
2008-09-18 14:13 ` Timur Tabi
2008-09-18 14:28 ` Haavard Skinnemoen
2008-09-18 14:31 ` Timur Tabi
2008-09-18 14:45 ` Haavard Skinnemoen
2008-09-18 14:49 ` Timur Tabi
2008-09-18 15:00 ` Haavard Skinnemoen
2008-09-19 4:20 ` Dan Williams
2008-09-19 11:25 ` Haavard Skinnemoen
2008-09-19 14:34 ` Timur Tabi
2008-09-19 14:50 ` linux-os (Dick Johnson)
2008-09-19 15:01 ` Timur Tabi
2008-09-19 15:28 ` Alan Cox
2008-09-20 23:00 ` Dan Williams [this message]
2008-09-21 9:26 ` Haavard Skinnemoen
2008-09-21 19:50 ` Guennadi Liakhovetski
2008-09-22 7:44 ` Haavard Skinnemoen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=e9c3a7c20809201600s3862da7qaab4a917220778e9@mail.gmail.com \
--to=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=haavard.skinnemoen@atmel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=timur@freescale.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®