[PATCH V4 12/14] spi/s3c64xx: Add support DMA engine API

[Vinod Koul]

On Tue, 2011-07-26 at 18:31 +0900, Boojin Kim wrote:
> Vinod Koul Wrote:
> > Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 8:17 PM
> > To: Boojin Kim
> > Cc: vinod.koul at intel.com; linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org; linux-
> > samsung-soc at vger.kernel.org; Kukjin Kim; Jassi Brar; Grant Likely;
> > Mark Brown; Dan Williams
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 12/14] spi/s3c64xx: Add support DMA engine API
> >
> > On Mon, 2011-07-25 at 10:28 +0900, Boojin Kim wrote:
> > > This patch adds to support DMA generic API to transfer raw
> > > SPI data. Basiclly the spi driver uses DMA generic API if
> > > architecture supports it. Otherwise, uses Samsung specific
> > > S3C-PL330 APIs.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Boojin Kim <boojin.kim at samsung.com>
> > > Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely at secretlab.ca>
> > > Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim at samsung.com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/spi/spi_s3c64xx.c |  141 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> > ----------
> > >  1 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 72 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi_s3c64xx.c b/drivers/spi/spi_s3c64xx.c
> > > index 8945e20..a4cf76a 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/spi/spi_s3c64xx.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/spi/spi_s3c64xx.c
> > > @@ -172,6 +172,9 @@ struct s3c64xx_spi_driver_data {
> > >  	unsigned                        state;
> > >  	unsigned                        cur_mode, cur_bpw;
> > >  	unsigned                        cur_speed;
> > > +	unsigned			rx_ch;
> > > +	unsigned			tx_ch;
> > > +	struct samsung_dma_ops		*ops;
> > >  };
> > >
> > >  static struct s3c2410_dma_client s3c64xx_spi_dma_client = {
> > > @@ -227,6 +230,38 @@ static void flush_fifo(struct
> > s3c64xx_spi_driver_data *sdd)
> > >  	writel(val, regs + S3C64XX_SPI_CH_CFG);
> > >  }
> > >
> > > +static void s3c64xx_spi_dma_rxcb(void *data)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct s3c64xx_spi_driver_data *sdd
> > > +		= (struct s3c64xx_spi_driver_data *)data;
> > > +	unsigned long flags;
> > > +
> > > +	spin_lock_irqsave(&sdd->lock, flags);
> > > +
> > > +	sdd->state &= ~RXBUSY;
> > > +	/* If the other done */
> > > +	if (!(sdd->state & TXBUSY))
> > > +		complete(&sdd->xfer_completion);
> > > +
> > > +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sdd->lock, flags);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static void s3c64xx_spi_dma_txcb(void *data)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct s3c64xx_spi_driver_data *sdd
> > > +		= (struct s3c64xx_spi_driver_data *)data;
> > > +	unsigned long flags;
> > > +
> > > +	spin_lock_irqsave(&sdd->lock, flags);
> > > +
> > > +	sdd->state &= ~TXBUSY;
> > > +	/* If the other done */
> > > +	if (!(sdd->state & RXBUSY))
> > > +		complete(&sdd->xfer_completion);
> > > +
> > > +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sdd->lock, flags);
> > > +}
> > I don't see much diff in these two functions and you should be able to
> > use a generic one which takes care of both TX and RX, does your
> > callback
> > data know if the channel is for TX or RX? If not then a helper to do
> > above should take care well and making code simpler
> I'm very agree with you.
> But, I think it isn't deeply related to this patch series. So, I wish to make 
> and submit it after this patch series is finished.
> 
Since you are reworking this driver would make sense to do now, it
doesn't sound to be a big change.

-- 
~Vinod Koul
Intel Corp.