From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wolfram Sang Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 V3] MXS: Implement DMA support into mxs-i2c Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 15:25:48 +0200 Message-ID: <20120716132548.GG17435@pengutronix.de> References: <1341850974-11977-1-git-send-email-marex@denx.de> <201207141409.38554.marex@denx.de> <20120716102151.GC17435@pengutronix.de> <201207161506.08147.marex@denx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="WkfBGePaEyrk4zXB" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201207161506.08147.marex-ynQEQJNshbs@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Marek Vasut Cc: Shawn Guo , linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Detlev Zundel , Dong Aisheng , Fabio Estevam , Linux ARM kernel , Sascha Hauer , Stefano Babic , Uwe =?iso-8859-15?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= , Wolfgang Denk List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org --WkfBGePaEyrk4zXB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > > > > No, it doesn't. See above about small transfers. Consider the easy > > > > > situation where you have sensor on one bus (so you do PIO because= you > > > > > transfer small data) and you have EEPROM on other bus, where you = use > > > > > DMA because you transfer large data. And the mixed mode isn't the= re > > > > > yet. > > > >=20 > > > > I fully understand what you want to configure. I did before. Yet, > > > > devicetree bindings are not platform_data and shouldn't be used like > > > > them. > > >=20 > > > But then, how would you configure this detail on a per-bus basis? Well > > > all > >=20 > > This is a question for devicetree-discuss. >=20 > Did you Cc it? Well, I guess you already checked the mail headers and found out yourself. The question behind the question probably is "Why didn't you CC it?". The answer to that is that I didn't have much success by adding it to $RANDOM_THREAD. It might be more efficient to answer starting a new thread with explicit "[RFC] $THE_ISSUE". Since a conclusion there won't make the next merge-window anyhow, I haven't done that now. That put aside, it might be more efficient if someone with a bigger urge might strive for a solution (yes, probably, but not necessarily you). For me, it currently is just one task which needs to be scheduled inbetween others. Regards, Wolfram --=20 Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | --WkfBGePaEyrk4zXB Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlAEFlwACgkQD27XaX1/VRvYHQCbBdHNmhRZZhXQC0IN4Aj1bSoJ tuwAoJpn6Q9UdVkSxbw77BfKTIo3KpJK =oX8T -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --WkfBGePaEyrk4zXB-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: w.sang@pengutronix.de (Wolfram Sang) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 15:25:48 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 2/2 V3] MXS: Implement DMA support into mxs-i2c In-Reply-To: <201207161506.08147.marex@denx.de> References: <1341850974-11977-1-git-send-email-marex@denx.de> <201207141409.38554.marex@denx.de> <20120716102151.GC17435@pengutronix.de> <201207161506.08147.marex@denx.de> Message-ID: <20120716132548.GG17435@pengutronix.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org > > > > > No, it doesn't. See above about small transfers. Consider the easy > > > > > situation where you have sensor on one bus (so you do PIO because you > > > > > transfer small data) and you have EEPROM on other bus, where you use > > > > > DMA because you transfer large data. And the mixed mode isn't there > > > > > yet. > > > > > > > > I fully understand what you want to configure. I did before. Yet, > > > > devicetree bindings are not platform_data and shouldn't be used like > > > > them. > > > > > > But then, how would you configure this detail on a per-bus basis? Well > > > all > > > > This is a question for devicetree-discuss. > > Did you Cc it? Well, I guess you already checked the mail headers and found out yourself. The question behind the question probably is "Why didn't you CC it?". The answer to that is that I didn't have much success by adding it to $RANDOM_THREAD. It might be more efficient to answer starting a new thread with explicit "[RFC] $THE_ISSUE". Since a conclusion there won't make the next merge-window anyhow, I haven't done that now. That put aside, it might be more efficient if someone with a bigger urge might strive for a solution (yes, probably, but not necessarily you). For me, it currently is just one task which needs to be scheduled inbetween others. Regards, Wolfram -- Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: