[PATCH 2/4] ARM: OMAP: DMA: Move plat/dma hearder to platform_data/dma-omap

[Jon Hunter]

On 09/28/2012 10:54 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 08:05:38AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>> * Shilimkar, Santosh <santosh.shilimkar at ti.com> [120928 08:02]:
>>> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 8:25 PM, Tony Lindgren <tony at atomide.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> * Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla at ti.com> [120928 06:41]:
>>>>> Move plat/dma.h header to platform_data/dma-omap.h as
>>>>> part of the single zImage work.
>>>>
>>>> Hmm there's no platform data in this header, just
>>>> exported things for drivers to use. So it should not
>>>> be placed into platform_data.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe it should be #include <asm/mach/dma-omap.h> for now?
>>>>
>>> I wasn't sure either when the file was placed under platform-data.
>>> I agree for now we can keep it mach layer but than means OMAP1 and
>>> OMAP2+ DMA header and source code needs to be split. That
>>> is not so straight forward.
>>
>> No need for that, the path I'm suggesting is located under
>> arch/arm/include/asm/mach, it's not same as include <mach/dma-omap.h>.
>>  
>>> With DMA engine conversion hopefully, we might get rid of the
>>> header eventually, but for now not sure whether we should
>>> go ahead and follow the splitting part.
>>>
>>> Thoughts ?
>>
>> No need for splitting anything :)
>>
>> The other possible location would be just include <linux/dma-omap.h>,
>> but as we all know that will be going away, <asm/mach/dma-omap.h>
>> is probably better.
> 
> No, not asm/mach/anything, please.  Let's try to get headers into the
> right place second time around.
> 
> This header appears to contain:
> 
> 1. definitions for DMA signals, used by drivers.
> 
>    This can be eliminated by using DT, platform data, or IORESOURCE_DMA
>    (that's in preference order) which then means that these definitions
>    can live in a header file in arch/arm/mach-omap*/ if at all.
> 
> 2. data definitions and structures used by drivers using the legacy OMAP
>    DMA API.
> 
> So, it doesn't contain platform data (as said above).  It's not an
> API definition between core ARM code and ARM platform code, so that
> rules out arch/arm/include/asm/mach.  Obviously arch/arm/include/asm
> is out of the question too.
> 
> I don't think we have a clear cut place for this to live - and lets
> be clear that this file will eventually be going away _anyway_ when
> OMAP is converted 100% to DMA engine.
> 
> So, where to put the file?  At the moment, I don't know, it doesn't
> seem to have an obvious home other than where it currently is, which
> then gets in the way of the single kernel work.

I am having the same problem with the OMAP dmtimer platform driver that
the legacy DMA driver has. It is slightly worse as currently it is pure
custom platform driver. Obviously long-term it would be best to create a
generic timer driver in drivers/timer/ that other devices and
architectures could use but we are a long way from that.

I know that this is ugly and has probably already been shot-down, but as
a short-term fix, has creating arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat-omap been
NAK'ed for such problematic drivers?

Cheers
Jon