[PATCH v5 0/8] dmaengine/dra7x: DMA router (crossbar support)
Vinod Koul
vinod.koul at intel.com
Sat May 9 04:44:23 PDT 2015
On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 12:35:46PM +0300, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> Vinod: is it OK if I send the Documnetation/dmanegine/ update a bit later when
> I have finished it?
>
> Changes since v4:
> - Comments from Maxime Ripard addressed:
> - long line fixed in of-dma.c
> - node leaks has been fixed in ti-dma-crossbar
> - Using devm_ioremap_resource() in ti-dma-crossbar
> - u16 casting has been addressed
> - Router drivers are expected to return with ERR_PTR in case their
> of_dma_route_allocate() callback fails.
>
> Changes since v3:
> - Comments from Russell:
> - Warnings removed in case of non DT boot when taking the DMA request number
> - Reduced the number of channels presented to DMAengine
> - removed the dma_sig parameter from omap_dma_chan_init()
> - Comments from Arnd:
> - dma-device property renamed to dma-masters
> - Allow list of phandes in dma-masters
>
> Changes since v2:
> - not using regmap for the TI crossbar driver.
>
> Changes since v1:
> - Comments from Russell King and Paul Bolle addressed:
> - Use the added defined in the omap-dma changes
> - MODULE_* removed from the ti-dma-crossbar driver.
> - DMA router documentation: do not limit the #dma-cells to be the same as the
> dma controller's #dma-cells. It might be possible to have a router which needs
> more information than the DMA controller (direct request pairing for example)
> - Use defines in the ti-dma-crossbar driver
> - Binding document for the ti-dma-crossbar driver
>
> Intro mail from v1:
>
> The series adds support for DMA router type of devices. They are used in SoCs
> which has more peripherals with DMA request lines than the DMA controller can
> handle.
> The router itself is not part of the DMA controller and it's operation should be
> transparent (as it is in the HW) for the SW stack.
>
> This series takes into accound the comments Sricharan received for his version
> of the crossbar driver:
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/7/199
>
> This implementation is not tied to any DMA driver so it is possible to use the
> framework by other vendors, also ACPI version of binding can be easy enough to
> be added.
I have applied all but last change to topic/omap
Thanks
--
~Vinod
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list