Re: [PATCH v7 01/10] ARM: davinci: move private EDMA API to arm/common

[Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>]

On Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 04:07:59AM +0400, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> Hello.
>
> On 02-02-2013 1:30, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>
>>> On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 11:49:11PM +0300, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
>>>>> good point, do you wanna send some patches ?
>
>>>>     I have already sent them countless times and even stuck CPPI 4.1 support (in
>>>> arch/arm/common/cppi41.c) in Russell's patch system. TI requested to remove the
>>>> patch. :-(
>
>>> sticking into arch/arm/common/ wasn't a nice move. But then again, so
>>> wasn't asking for the patch to be removed :-s
>
>> Err, patches don't get removed, they get moved to 'discarded'.
>
>    Any chance to bring it back to life? :-)
>    Although... drivers/usb/musb/cppi41.c would need to be somewhat 
> reworked for at least AM35x and I don't have time. But that may change, 
> of course.

Right, I've just looked back at the various meeting minutes from December
2010 when the CPPI stuff was discussed.  Yes, I archive these things and
all email discussions for referencing in cases like this.

Unfortunately, they do not contain any useful information other than the
topic having been brought up.  At that point, the CPPI stuff was in
mach-davinci, and I had suggested moving it into drivers/dma.

The result of that was to say that it doesn't fit the DMA engine APIs.
So someone came up with the idea of putting it in arch/arm/common - which
I frankly ignored by email (how long have we been saying "no drivers in
arch/arm" ?)

Now, it would've been discussed in that meeting, but unfortunately no
record exists of that.  What does follow that meeting is a discussion
trail.  From what I can see there, but it looks to me like the decision
was taken to move it to the DMA engine API, and work on sorting out MUSB
was going to commence.

The last email in that says "I'll get to that soon"... and that is also
the final email I have on this topic.  I guess if nothing has happened...
Shrug, that's someone elses problem.

Anyway, the answer for putting it in arch/arm/common hasn't changed,
and really, where we are now, post Linus having a moan about the size
of arch/arm, that answer is even more concrete in the negative.  It's
54K of code which should not be under arch/arm at all.

Anyway, if you need to look at the patch, it's 6305/1.  Typing into the
summary search box 'cppi' found it in one go.