Re: [PATCH 0/3] dmaengine: Stear users towards dma_request_slave_chan()

Re: [PATCH 0/3] dmaengine: Stear users towards dma_request_slave_chan()

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Peter,

On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 1:49 PM Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> wrote:
> On 03/02/2020 13.16, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 12:59 PM Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> wrote:
> >> On 03/02/2020 12.37, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 12:32 PM Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> wrote:
> >>>> Advise users of dma_request_slave_channel() and
> >>>> dma_request_slave_channel_compat() to move to dma_request_slave_chan()
> >>>
> >>> How? There are legacy ARM boards you have to care / remove before.
> >>> DMAengine subsystem makes a p*s off decisions
> >>
> >> The dma_slave_map support is added few years back for the legacy ARM
> >> boards, because we do care.
> >> daVinci, OMAP1, pxa, s3cx4xx and even m68k/coldfire moved over.
> >
> > Then why simple not to convert (start converting) those few drivers to
> > new API and simple remove the old one?
>
> _if_ the dma_request_slave_channel_compat() is really falling back after
> dma_request_chan() - this is what it calls first, then it is not a
> simple convert to a new API.
> 1. The arch needs to define the dma_slave_map for the SoC.
> 2. The dma driver needs few lines to add it to DMAengine core (+pdata
> change).
> After this the _compat() can be replaced with dma_request_chan()
>
> In most cases I do not have access to documentation and boards to test.
>
> Looking at the output of 'git grep dma_request_slave_channel_compat':
> drivers/mmc/host/renesas_sdhi_sys_dmac.c
> drivers/spi/spi-pxa2xx-dma.c
> drivers/spi/spi-rspi.c
> drivers/spi/spi-sh-msiof.c
> drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_dma.c
>
> From these rspi boots only in DT and I'm not sure about the others.

Both rspi and sh-msiof have users on legacy SH (i.e. without DT):

    arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh4a/setup-sh7757.c: .name   = "rspi",
    arch/sh/boards/mach-ecovec24/setup.c:   .name           = "spi_sh_msiof",

The former seems to be used with drivers/dma/sh/shdmac.c:

    arch/sh/include/cpu-sh4/cpu/sh7757.h:   SHDMA_SLAVE_RSPI_TX,
    arch/sh/include/cpu-sh4/cpu/sh7757.h:   SHDMA_SLAVE_RSPI_RX,
    arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh4a/setup-sh7757.c:         .slave_id       =
SHDMA_SLAVE_RSPI_TX,
    arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh4a/setup-sh7757.c:         .slave_id       =
SHDMA_SLAVE_RSPI_RX,

but I have no idea if it still works (and no hardware).

The latter doesn't seem to be used with DMA on ecovec24/sh7724, so
probably we can just drop the _compat() from sh-sh-msiof.c.

BTW, we no longer support non-legacy DMA in drivers/tty/serial/sh-sci.c
(DMA was completely broken in that driver when I added DT suppport),
but it seems it was used at some point on various SH, cfr. e.g.
arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh4a/setup-sh7724.c still setting up the channels.
Which might be a motivation for just dropping _compat() from spi-rspi.c,
too? ;-)

Anyone who cares for DMA on SuperH?

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

Re: [PATCH 0/3] dmaengine: Stear users towards dma_request_slave_chan()

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 2/3/20 2:32 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Both rspi and sh-msiof have users on legacy SH (i.e. without DT):

FWIW, there is a patch set by Yoshinori Sato to add device tree support
for classical SuperH hardware. It was never merged, unfortunately :(.

> Anyone who cares for DMA on SuperH?

What is DMA used for on SuperH? Wouldn't dropping it cut support for
essential hardware features?

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaubitz@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913

Re: [PATCH 0/3] dmaengine: Stear users towards dma_request_slave_chan()

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Adrian,

On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 9:21 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
<glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
> On 2/3/20 2:32 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > Both rspi and sh-msiof have users on legacy SH (i.e. without DT):
>
> FWIW, there is a patch set by Yoshinori Sato to add device tree support
> for classical SuperH hardware. It was never merged, unfortunately :(.

True.

> > Anyone who cares for DMA on SuperH?
>
> What is DMA used for on SuperH? Wouldn't dropping it cut support for
> essential hardware features?

It may make a few things slower.

Does any of your SuperH boards use DMA?
Anything interesting in /proc or /sys w.r.t. DMA?

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

Re: [PATCH 0/3] dmaengine: Stear users towards dma_request_slave_chan()

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

Hi Geert!

On 2/3/20 9:34 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 9:21 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>> On 2/3/20 2:32 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>> Both rspi and sh-msiof have users on legacy SH (i.e. without DT):
>>
>> FWIW, there is a patch set by Yoshinori Sato to add device tree support
>> for classical SuperH hardware. It was never merged, unfortunately :(.
> 
> True.

Would it be possible to keep DMA support if device tree support was
added for SuperH? I think Rich eventually wanted to merge the patches,
there were just some minor issues with them.

It would be great if we could still get them merged. I would be happy
to help with the testing.

>>> Anyone who cares for DMA on SuperH?
>>
>> What is DMA used for on SuperH? Wouldn't dropping it cut support for
>> essential hardware features?
> 
> It may make a few things slower.
> 
> Does any of your SuperH boards use DMA?
> Anything interesting in /proc or /sys w.r.t. DMA?

I have:

root@tirpitz:/sys> find . -iname "*dma*"
./bus/dma
./bus/dma/devices/dma0
./bus/dma/devices/dma1
./bus/dma/devices/dma2
./bus/dma/devices/dma3
./bus/dma/devices/dma4
./bus/dma/devices/dma5
./bus/dma/devices/dma6
./bus/dma/devices/dma7
./bus/dma/devices/dma8
./bus/dma/devices/dma9
./bus/dma/devices/dma10
./bus/dma/devices/dma11
./bus/platform/devices/sh_dmac
./bus/platform/devices/sh-dma-engine.0
./bus/platform/devices/sh-dma-engine.1
./devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:00.0/consistent_dma_mask_bits
./devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:00.0/dma_mask_bits
./devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:01.0/ata1/host0/scsi_host/host0/unchecked_isa_dma
./devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:01.0/ata1/link1/dev1.0/ata_device/dev1.0/dma_mode
./devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:01.0/ata2/host1/scsi_host/host1/unchecked_isa_dma
./devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:01.0/ata2/link2/dev2.0/ata_device/dev2.0/dma_mode
./devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:01.0/consistent_dma_mask_bits
./devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:01.0/dma_mask_bits
./devices/system/dma
./devices/system/dma/dma0
./devices/system/dma/dma1
./devices/system/dma/dma2
./devices/system/dma/dma3
./devices/system/dma/dma4
./devices/system/dma/dma5
./devices/system/dma/dma6
root@tirpitz:~> find /proc -iname "*dma*"
/proc/dma
/proc/irq/52/DMAC Address Error1
/proc/irq/33/DMAC Address Error0
/proc/sys/fs/nfs/idmap_cache_timeout
find: ‘/proc/5703’: No such file or directory
find: ‘/proc/5704’: No such file or directory
find: ‘/proc/5705’: No such file or directory
root@tirpitz:~> cat /proc/dma
root@tirpitz:~> find /sys -iname "*dma*"      
/sys/bus/dma
/sys/bus/dma/devices/dma0
/sys/bus/dma/devices/dma1
/sys/bus/dma/devices/dma2
/sys/bus/dma/devices/dma3
/sys/bus/dma/devices/dma4
/sys/bus/dma/devices/dma5
/sys/bus/dma/devices/dma6
/sys/bus/dma/devices/dma7
/sys/bus/dma/devices/dma8
/sys/bus/dma/devices/dma9
/sys/bus/dma/devices/dma10
/sys/bus/dma/devices/dma11
/sys/bus/platform/devices/sh_dmac
/sys/bus/platform/devices/sh-dma-engine.0
/sys/bus/platform/devices/sh-dma-engine.1
/sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:00.0/consistent_dma_mask_bits
/sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:00.0/dma_mask_bits
/sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:01.0/ata1/host0/scsi_host/host0/unchecked_isa_dma
/sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:01.0/ata1/link1/dev1.0/ata_device/dev1.0/dma_mode
/sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:01.0/ata2/host1/scsi_host/host1/unchecked_isa_dma
/sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:01.0/ata2/link2/dev2.0/ata_device/dev2.0/dma_mode
/sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:01.0/consistent_dma_mask_bits
/sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:01.0/dma_mask_bits
/sys/devices/system/dma
/sys/devices/system/dma/dma0
/sys/devices/system/dma/dma1
/sys/devices/system/dma/dma2
/sys/devices/system/dma/dma3
/sys/devices/system/dma/dma4
/sys/devices/system/dma/dma5
/sys/devices/system/dma/dma6
/sys/devices/system/dma/dma7
/sys/devices/system/dma/dma8
/sys/devices/system/dma/dma9
/sys/devices/system/dma/dma10
/sys/devices/system/dma/dma11
/sys/devices/virtual/misc/cpu_dma_latency
/sys/devices/platform/sh_dmac
/sys/devices/platform/sh_dmac/dma0
/sys/devices/platform/sh_dmac/dma1
/sys/devices/platform/sh_dmac/dma2
/sys/devices/platform/sh_dmac/dma3
/sys/devices/platform/sh_dmac/dma4
/sys/devices/platform/sh_dmac/dma5
/sys/devices/platform/sh_dmac/dma6
/sys/devices/platform/sh_dmac/dma7
/sys/devices/platform/sh_dmac/dma8
/sys/devices/platform/sh_dmac/dma9
/sys/devices/platform/sh_dmac/dma10
/sys/devices/platform/sh_dmac/dma11
/sys/devices/platform/r8a66597_hcd/usb1/1-1/1-1:1.0/host2/scsi_host/host2/unchecked_isa_dma
/sys/devices/platform/sh-dma-engine.0
/sys/devices/platform/sh-dma-engine.1
/sys/class/misc/cpu_dma_latency
/sys/module/nfs/parameters/nfs4_disable_idmapping
/sys/module/nfs/parameters/nfs_idmap_cache_timeout
/sys/module/libata/parameters/dma
/sys/module/libata/parameters/atapi_dmadir
root@tirpitz:~>

On my SH-7785LCR.

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaubitz@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913

Re: [PATCH 0/3] dmaengine: Stear users towards dma_request_slave_chan()

[Peter Ujfalusi]

Hi Geert, Adrian,

On 03/02/2020 22.34, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Adrian,
> 
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 9:21 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>> On 2/3/20 2:32 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>> Both rspi and sh-msiof have users on legacy SH (i.e. without DT):
>>
>> FWIW, there is a patch set by Yoshinori Sato to add device tree support
>> for classical SuperH hardware. It was never merged, unfortunately :(.
> 
> True.
> 
>>> Anyone who cares for DMA on SuperH?
>>
>> What is DMA used for on SuperH? Wouldn't dropping it cut support for
>> essential hardware features?
> 
> It may make a few things slower.

I would not drop DMA support but I would suggest to add dma_slave_map
for non DT boot so the _compat() can be dropped.

Imho on lower spec SoC (and I believe SuperH is) the DMA makes big
difference offloading data movement from the CPU.

> Does any of your SuperH boards use DMA?
> Anything interesting in /proc or /sys w.r.t. DMA?
> 
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
> 
>                         Geert
> 

- Péter

Texas Instruments Finland Oy, Porkkalankatu 22, 00180 Helsinki.
Y-tunnus/Business ID: 0615521-4. Kotipaikka/Domicile: Helsinki

Re: [PATCH 0/3] dmaengine: Stear users towards dma_request_slave_chan()

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Peter,

On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 7:52 AM Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> wrote:
> On 03/02/2020 22.34, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 9:21 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> > <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
> >> On 2/3/20 2:32 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >>> Both rspi and sh-msiof have users on legacy SH (i.e. without DT):
> >>
> >> FWIW, there is a patch set by Yoshinori Sato to add device tree support
> >> for classical SuperH hardware. It was never merged, unfortunately :(.
> >
> > True.
> >
> >>> Anyone who cares for DMA on SuperH?
> >>
> >> What is DMA used for on SuperH? Wouldn't dropping it cut support for
> >> essential hardware features?
> >
> > It may make a few things slower.
>
> I would not drop DMA support but I would suggest to add dma_slave_map
> for non DT boot so the _compat() can be dropped.

Which is similar in spirit to gpiod_lookup and clk_register_clkdev(),
right?

> Imho on lower spec SoC (and I believe SuperH is) the DMA makes big
> difference offloading data movement from the CPU.

Assumed it is actually used...

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

Re: [PATCH 0/3] dmaengine: Stear users towards dma_request_slave_chan()

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Adrian,

On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 10:26 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
<glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
> On 2/3/20 9:34 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 9:21 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> > <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
> >> On 2/3/20 2:32 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >>> Both rspi and sh-msiof have users on legacy SH (i.e. without DT):
> >>
> >> FWIW, there is a patch set by Yoshinori Sato to add device tree support
> >> for classical SuperH hardware. It was never merged, unfortunately :(.
> >
> > True.
>
> Would it be possible to keep DMA support if device tree support was
> added for SuperH? I think Rich eventually wanted to merge the patches,
> there were just some minor issues with them.

Adding DT support would definitely make things easier, but would be a lot
of work.
However, using dma_slave_map would be an alternative.

> >>> Anyone who cares for DMA on SuperH?
> >>
> >> What is DMA used for on SuperH? Wouldn't dropping it cut support for
> >> essential hardware features?
> >
> > It may make a few things slower.
> >
> > Does any of your SuperH boards use DMA?
> > Anything interesting in /proc or /sys w.r.t. DMA?
>
> I have:
>
> root@tirpitz:/sys> find . -iname "*dma*"
> ./bus/dma
> ./bus/dma/devices/dma0
> ./bus/dma/devices/dma1
> ./bus/dma/devices/dma2
> ./bus/dma/devices/dma3
> ./bus/dma/devices/dma4
> ./bus/dma/devices/dma5
> ./bus/dma/devices/dma6
> ./bus/dma/devices/dma7
> ./bus/dma/devices/dma8
> ./bus/dma/devices/dma9
> ./bus/dma/devices/dma10
> ./bus/dma/devices/dma11
> ./bus/platform/devices/sh_dmac
> ./bus/platform/devices/sh-dma-engine.0
> ./bus/platform/devices/sh-dma-engine.1

So you do have the two dmaengines...

> On my SH-7785LCR.

... but are they actually used?

git grep -E "(SHDMA|sh_dmae_slave_config)" -- "arch/sh/*7785*"
doesn't come up with any matches, so I don't think any sh7785 platform
is wired to use DMA (yet), only sh7757 and sh772[234].

To double-check:
With current upstream, you can look for "slave" symlinks in sysfs.
With older kernels, you can look at the interrupt counts for the DMACs
in /proc/interrupts.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

Re: [PATCH 0/3] dmaengine: Stear users towards dma_request_slave_chan()

[Peter Ujfalusi]

Hi Geert,

On 04/02/2020 10.01, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> 
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 7:52 AM Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> wrote:
>> On 03/02/2020 22.34, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 9:21 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
>>> <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>>>> On 2/3/20 2:32 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>>>> Both rspi and sh-msiof have users on legacy SH (i.e. without DT):
>>>>
>>>> FWIW, there is a patch set by Yoshinori Sato to add device tree support
>>>> for classical SuperH hardware. It was never merged, unfortunately :(.
>>>
>>> True.
>>>
>>>>> Anyone who cares for DMA on SuperH?
>>>>
>>>> What is DMA used for on SuperH? Wouldn't dropping it cut support for
>>>> essential hardware features?
>>>
>>> It may make a few things slower.
>>
>> I would not drop DMA support but I would suggest to add dma_slave_map
>> for non DT boot so the _compat() can be dropped.
> 
> Which is similar in spirit to gpiod_lookup and clk_register_clkdev(),
> right?

Yes, it is similar:

/* OMAP730, OMAP850 */
static const struct dma_slave_map omap7xx_sdma_map[] = {
	{ "omap-mcbsp.1", "tx", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(8) },
	{ "omap-mcbsp.1", "rx", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(9) },
	{ "omap-mcbsp.2", "tx", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(10) },
	{ "omap-mcbsp.2", "rx", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(11) },
	{ "mmci-omap.0", "tx", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(21) },
	{ "mmci-omap.0", "rx", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(22) },
	{ "omap_udc", "rx0", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(26) },
	{ "omap_udc", "rx1", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(27) },
	{ "omap_udc", "rx2", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(28) },
	{ "omap_udc", "tx0", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(29) },
	{ "omap_udc", "tx1", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(30) },
	{ "omap_udc", "tx2", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(31) },
};

"device name", "channel name", "parameter for filter"

The in the DMA driver (omap-dma.c):
	od->ddev.filter.map = od->plat->slave_map;
	od->ddev.filter.mapcnt = od->plat->slavecnt;
	od->ddev.filter.fn = omap_dma_filter_fn;

When things are converted the filter function no longer needs to be
exported, it is local to the DMA driver.

> 
>> Imho on lower spec SoC (and I believe SuperH is) the DMA makes big
>> difference offloading data movement from the CPU.
> 
> Assumed it is actually used...

Right, imho (again) we should not decide if given SoC needs it or not.
It is up to the drivers to use it or not, but with the dma_slave_map
there is no difference between DT or legacy boot handling towards DMA.

> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
> 
>                         Geert
> 

- Péter

Texas Instruments Finland Oy, Porkkalankatu 22, 00180 Helsinki.
Y-tunnus/Business ID: 0615521-4. Kotipaikka/Domicile: Helsinki

Re: [PATCH 0/3] dmaengine: Stear users towards dma_request_slave_chan()

[Peter Ujfalusi]

On 04/02/2020 10.15, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> Hi Geert,
> 
> On 04/02/2020 10.01, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> Hi Peter,
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 7:52 AM Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> wrote:
>>> On 03/02/2020 22.34, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 9:21 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
>>>> <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>>>>> On 2/3/20 2:32 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>>>>> Both rspi and sh-msiof have users on legacy SH (i.e. without DT):
>>>>>
>>>>> FWIW, there is a patch set by Yoshinori Sato to add device tree support
>>>>> for classical SuperH hardware. It was never merged, unfortunately :(.
>>>>
>>>> True.
>>>>
>>>>>> Anyone who cares for DMA on SuperH?
>>>>>
>>>>> What is DMA used for on SuperH? Wouldn't dropping it cut support for
>>>>> essential hardware features?
>>>>
>>>> It may make a few things slower.
>>>
>>> I would not drop DMA support but I would suggest to add dma_slave_map
>>> for non DT boot so the _compat() can be dropped.
>>
>> Which is similar in spirit to gpiod_lookup and clk_register_clkdev(),
>> right?
> 
> Yes, it is similar:
> 
> /* OMAP730, OMAP850 */
> static const struct dma_slave_map omap7xx_sdma_map[] = {
> 	{ "omap-mcbsp.1", "tx", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(8) },
> 	{ "omap-mcbsp.1", "rx", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(9) },
> 	{ "omap-mcbsp.2", "tx", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(10) },
> 	{ "omap-mcbsp.2", "rx", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(11) },
> 	{ "mmci-omap.0", "tx", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(21) },
> 	{ "mmci-omap.0", "rx", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(22) },
> 	{ "omap_udc", "rx0", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(26) },
> 	{ "omap_udc", "rx1", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(27) },
> 	{ "omap_udc", "rx2", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(28) },
> 	{ "omap_udc", "tx0", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(29) },
> 	{ "omap_udc", "tx1", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(30) },
> 	{ "omap_udc", "tx2", SDMA_FILTER_PARAM(31) },
> };
> 
> "device name", "channel name", "parameter for filter"

fwiw for EDMA on daVinci we have these (for da850):
static const struct dma_slave_map da850_edma0_map[] = {
	{ "davinci-mcasp.0", "rx", EDMA_FILTER_PARAM(0, 0) },
	{ "davinci-mcasp.0", "tx", EDMA_FILTER_PARAM(0, 1) },
	{ "davinci-mcbsp.0", "rx", EDMA_FILTER_PARAM(0, 2) },
	{ "davinci-mcbsp.0", "tx", EDMA_FILTER_PARAM(0, 3) },
	{ "davinci-mcbsp.1", "rx", EDMA_FILTER_PARAM(0, 4) },
	{ "davinci-mcbsp.1", "tx", EDMA_FILTER_PARAM(0, 5) },
	{ "spi_davinci.0", "rx", EDMA_FILTER_PARAM(0, 14) },
	{ "spi_davinci.0", "tx", EDMA_FILTER_PARAM(0, 15) },
	{ "da830-mmc.0", "rx", EDMA_FILTER_PARAM(0, 16) },
	{ "da830-mmc.0", "tx", EDMA_FILTER_PARAM(0, 17) },
	{ "spi_davinci.1", "rx", EDMA_FILTER_PARAM(0, 18) },
	{ "spi_davinci.1", "tx", EDMA_FILTER_PARAM(0, 19) },
};

static const struct dma_slave_map da850_edma1_map[] = {
	{ "da830-mmc.1", "rx", EDMA_FILTER_PARAM(1, 28) },
	{ "da830-mmc.1", "tx", EDMA_FILTER_PARAM(1, 29) },
};

and in the DMA driver:
	ecc->dma_slave.filter.map = info->slave_map;
	ecc->dma_slave.filter.mapcnt = info->slavecnt;
	ecc->dma_slave.filter.fn = edma_filter_fn;

When I added the dma_slave_map support it was done in a way that it
could be used by anyone having the same issue as we were facing with
legacy daVinci and OMAP1 boards (no DT support in sight).

Drivers do not need to care about legacy/DT boot.

> 
> The in the DMA driver (omap-dma.c):
> 	od->ddev.filter.map = od->plat->slave_map;
> 	od->ddev.filter.mapcnt = od->plat->slavecnt;
> 	od->ddev.filter.fn = omap_dma_filter_fn;
> 
> When things are converted the filter function no longer needs to be
> exported, it is local to the DMA driver.
> 
>>
>>> Imho on lower spec SoC (and I believe SuperH is) the DMA makes big
>>> difference offloading data movement from the CPU.
>>
>> Assumed it is actually used...
> 
> Right, imho (again) we should not decide if given SoC needs it or not.
> It is up to the drivers to use it or not, but with the dma_slave_map
> there is no difference between DT or legacy boot handling towards DMA.
> 
>> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>>
>>                         Geert
>>
> 
> - Péter
> 
> Texas Instruments Finland Oy, Porkkalankatu 22, 00180 Helsinki.
> Y-tunnus/Business ID: 0615521-4. Kotipaikka/Domicile: Helsinki
> 

- Péter

Texas Instruments Finland Oy, Porkkalankatu 22, 00180 Helsinki.
Y-tunnus/Business ID: 0615521-4. Kotipaikka/Domicile: Helsinki

Re: [PATCH 0/3] dmaengine: Stear users towards dma_request_slave_chan()

[Rob Landley]

On 2/4/20 2:01 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> 
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 7:52 AM Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> wrote:
>> On 03/02/2020 22.34, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 9:21 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
>>> <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>>>> On 2/3/20 2:32 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>>>> Both rspi and sh-msiof have users on legacy SH (i.e. without DT):
>>>>
>>>> FWIW, there is a patch set by Yoshinori Sato to add device tree support
>>>> for classical SuperH hardware. It was never merged, unfortunately :(.
>>>
>>> True.
>>>
>>>>> Anyone who cares for DMA on SuperH?
>>>>
>>>> What is DMA used for on SuperH? Wouldn't dropping it cut support for
>>>> essential hardware features?
>>>
>>> It may make a few things slower.

The j-core stuff has DMA but we haven't hooked it up to dmaengine yet. (It's on
the todo list but pretty far down.)

I fought with dmaengine in a 7760 board in 2018, and got it to run its tests but
the ship deadline arrived before I got the ethernet working with it.

I found the documentation fairly impenetrable, is there a good primer on what's
_current_ for new implementations? (I had similar questions for gpio. It's easy
to google for "here's how you did it in 2010"...)

>> I would not drop DMA support but I would suggest to add dma_slave_map
>> for non DT boot so the _compat() can be dropped.
> 
> Which is similar in spirit to gpiod_lookup and clk_register_clkdev(),
> right?
> 
>> Imho on lower spec SoC (and I believe SuperH is) the DMA makes big
>> difference offloading data movement from the CPU.
> 
> Assumed it is actually used...

The turtle boards need it USB, ethernet, and sdcard, but Rich Felker hasn't
finished the j32 port yet (we just got him the updated docs last month) and the
existing implementation is nommu so the things that are using it are reaching
around behind the OS's back...

Rob

Re: [PATCH 0/3] dmaengine: Stear users towards dma_request_slave_chan()

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Rob,

On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 10:12 AM Rob Landley <rob@landley.net> wrote:
> On 2/4/20 2:01 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 7:52 AM Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> wrote:
> >> On 03/02/2020 22.34, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 9:21 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> >>> <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
> >>>> On 2/3/20 2:32 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >>>>> Both rspi and sh-msiof have users on legacy SH (i.e. without DT):
> >>>>
> >>>> FWIW, there is a patch set by Yoshinori Sato to add device tree support
> >>>> for classical SuperH hardware. It was never merged, unfortunately :(.
> >>>
> >>> True.
> >>>
> >>>>> Anyone who cares for DMA on SuperH?
> >>>>
> >>>> What is DMA used for on SuperH? Wouldn't dropping it cut support for
> >>>> essential hardware features?
> >>>
> >>> It may make a few things slower.
>
> The j-core stuff has DMA but we haven't hooked it up to dmaengine yet. (It's on
> the todo list but pretty far down.)

And would use DT.  Hence the issue is not applicable to j-core.

> The turtle boards need it USB, ethernet, and sdcard, but Rich Felker hasn't
> finished the j32 port yet (we just got him the updated docs last month) and the
> existing implementation is nommu so the things that are using it are reaching
> around behind the OS's back...

Is j32 the (rebranded) j4?

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

Re: [PATCH 0/3] dmaengine: Stear users towards dma_request_slave_chan()

[Rob Landley]

On 2/4/20 3:27 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Rob,
> 
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 10:12 AM Rob Landley <rob@landley.net> wrote:
>> On 2/4/20 2:01 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 7:52 AM Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> wrote:
>>>> On 03/02/2020 22.34, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 9:21 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
>>>>> <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2/3/20 2:32 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>>>>>> Both rspi and sh-msiof have users on legacy SH (i.e. without DT):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> FWIW, there is a patch set by Yoshinori Sato to add device tree support
>>>>>> for classical SuperH hardware. It was never merged, unfortunately :(.

The problem with converting everything else to j-core has always been regression
testing. I have 2 pieces of classing sh4 hardware, and one classing sh2 board,
and none of them are currently on the same continent I am. :)

(I've got 3 different j-core boards, though. And am currently in the same room
as 2 others. :)

>>>>> True.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Anyone who cares for DMA on SuperH?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What is DMA used for on SuperH? Wouldn't dropping it cut support for
>>>>>> essential hardware features?
>>>>>
>>>>> It may make a few things slower.
>>
>> The j-core stuff has DMA but we haven't hooked it up to dmaengine yet. (It's on
>> the todo list but pretty far down.)
> 
> And would use DT.  Hence the issue is not applicable to j-core.

Indeed.

The last classic sh4 board I used did not have DMA hooked up in Linux, and
trying to make current kernels work hit the fact that the device tree people
kept breaking various pre-device tree APIs, and my patches to fix them were met
with "you should convert everything to device tree rather than fix this obvious
regression we caused" and thus never went upstream. (Johnson Controls shipped
them locally and I handed the patches over to the lawyers to do the license
compliance tarball before I left. And of course I posted the fixes to this list...)

It's nice that at least this time somebody is _asking_ before breaking
non-device-tree support for stuff that used to work...

>> The turtle boards need it USB, ethernet, and sdcard, but Rich Felker hasn't
>> finished the j32 port yet (we just got him the updated docs last month) and the
>> existing implementation is nommu so the things that are using it are reaching
>> around behind the OS's back...
> 
> Is j32 the (rebranded) j4?

Yes.

Rob