[PATCH] DMAEngine: sirf: let the users be able to pause and resume specific buffer

[Vinod Koul]

On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 01:08:30PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:14:24AM +0800, Barry Song wrote:
> > 2013/7/4 Barry Song <Baohua.Song at csr.com>
> > >
> > > From: Qipan Li <Qipan.Li at csr.com>
> > >
> > > this patch adds a buffer_index in pause and resume entries, then users can
> > > pause and resume a buffer they want, but don't pause the whole dma.
> > >
> > > a typical application scenerios is Ping-Pang in two buffers: at the
> > > beginning, we enable buf1 and buf2 to receive dma data, after buf1 is
> > > full, we pause buf1 and handle the data in this buffer to avoid overflow
> > > in buf1. but at the same time, dma is still tranferring in buf2.  once we
> > > have finished data process in buf1, we enable buf1 again.  this will
> > > maximize the chance of dma transferring. users pause buf1 by:
> > > dmaengine_device_control(sirfport->rx_dma_chan, DMA_PAUSE, 1); users pause
> > > buf2 by: dmaengine_device_control(sirfport->rx_dma_chan, DMA_PAUSE, 2);
> > > users can still pause the whole dma transferring by dmaengine_pause().
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Qipan Li <Qipan.Li at csr.com> Signed-off-by: Barry Song
> > > <Baohua.Song at csr.com> --- drivers/dma/sirf-dma.c | 102
> > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- 1 file changed, 80
> > > insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> > 
> > Hi Vinod, as we still have some other patches of dma clients depending on
> > this, would you give some comments about it?
> 
> You at least need to write up some documentation about this new feature - you
> need to describe exactly how this argument relates to a set of queued DMA
> descriptor(s) and its semantics with respect to those queued descriptors.
As I commented earlier today, I dont think we need this way. This can also be
achieved with submitting descriptors after the buffer has been processed.

> From the looks of this patch, it has nothing to do with any particular
> queued descriptor, but you're exposing internal knowledge of the SiRF
> DMA engine.
More than dmaengine its the way of modelling here which seems to be the issue

~Vinod
--