From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Russell King - ARM Linux Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] ASoC: dmaengine_pcm: support generic DMA binding users Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 11:17:04 +0000 Message-ID: <20130322111704.GZ4977@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1363318601-31505-1-git-send-email-shawn.guo@linaro.org> <20130321023858.GD6281@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net> <514B21F3.90803@metafoo.de> <20130321152206.GA14768@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk (caramon.arm.linux.org.uk [78.32.30.218]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id E11FD2664D8 for ; Fri, 22 Mar 2013 12:17:20 +0100 (CET) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130321152206.GA14768@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: Mark Brown Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, Lars-Peter Clausen , Vinod Koul , Sebastien Guiriec , Markus Pargmann , Shawn Guo , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 04:22:06PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 04:06:27PM +0100, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote: > > > Hm, I only saw this series today would have been good to be on Cc. I've been > > working on something very similar. My series goes a bit further though, it > > implements an (almost generic) dmaengine based PCM driver using the of > > bindings. So you need almost no platform code. The only things that are > > platform specific at the moment is the pcm_hardware struct, but I'd like to > > replace that in the future with something that queries the pcm hardware > > parameter like max_period from the DMA engine driver. And another bit that is > > still driver specific is a callback that fills the dma_slave_config struct. > > FWIW it might be worth looking at the one rmk wrote but has never wanted > to submit for whatever reason. Err no, stop twisting the facts. I know nothing is ever your fault. You rejected it because it was providing support for non-cyclic supporting DMA engine drivers. I've since added support to it for cyclic DMA engines, but I've retained the non-cyclic support in it because I don't see why I should remove it when it works for me, especially given the difficulties with getting anything in sound/soc changed once its been merged. Plus, as I've already said to you, I no longer develop and test it because the platform I was using is now doing service as my firewall, and you'll forgive me for not wanting to take the whole of *.arm.linux.org.uk offline to mess around with ASoC stuff. But that's not to say I don't care about the issue. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux) Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 11:17:04 +0000 Subject: [alsa-devel] [PATCH 0/2] ASoC: dmaengine_pcm: support generic DMA binding users In-Reply-To: <20130321152206.GA14768@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1363318601-31505-1-git-send-email-shawn.guo@linaro.org> <20130321023858.GD6281@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net> <514B21F3.90803@metafoo.de> <20130321152206.GA14768@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Message-ID: <20130322111704.GZ4977@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 04:22:06PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 04:06:27PM +0100, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote: > > > Hm, I only saw this series today would have been good to be on Cc. I've been > > working on something very similar. My series goes a bit further though, it > > implements an (almost generic) dmaengine based PCM driver using the of > > bindings. So you need almost no platform code. The only things that are > > platform specific at the moment is the pcm_hardware struct, but I'd like to > > replace that in the future with something that queries the pcm hardware > > parameter like max_period from the DMA engine driver. And another bit that is > > still driver specific is a callback that fills the dma_slave_config struct. > > FWIW it might be worth looking at the one rmk wrote but has never wanted > to submit for whatever reason. Err no, stop twisting the facts. I know nothing is ever your fault. You rejected it because it was providing support for non-cyclic supporting DMA engine drivers. I've since added support to it for cyclic DMA engines, but I've retained the non-cyclic support in it because I don't see why I should remove it when it works for me, especially given the difficulties with getting anything in sound/soc changed once its been merged. Plus, as I've already said to you, I no longer develop and test it because the platform I was using is now doing service as my firewall, and you'll forgive me for not wanting to take the whole of *.arm.linux.org.uk offline to mess around with ASoC stuff. But that's not to say I don't care about the issue.