From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965569AbbJILiO (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Oct 2015 07:38:14 -0400 Received: from smtp-out-092.synserver.de ([212.40.185.92]:1213 "EHLO smtp-out-070.synserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965550AbbJILiK (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Oct 2015 07:38:10 -0400 X-SynServer-TrustedSrc: 1 X-SynServer-AuthUser: lars@metafoo.de X-SynServer-PPID: 32517 Message-ID: <5617A71D.4030006@metafoo.de> Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2015 13:38:05 +0200 From: Lars-Peter Clausen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Shawn Lin , Vinod Koul CC: Addy Ke , Heiko Stuebner , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, Doug Anderson , Takashi Iwai , dmaengine@vger.kernel.org, Mark Brown , Olof Johansson , Sonny Rao , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH v5 06/10] dmaengine: add API for getting dma controller's quirk References: <1442187923-5736-1-git-send-email-shawn.lin@rock-chips.com> <1442188139-6017-1-git-send-email-shawn.lin@rock-chips.com> <20151005153746.GG13501@vkoul-mobl.iind.intel.com> <56139289.7000005@rock-chips.com> <561629D6.9010702@metafoo.de> <5617A589.4090102@rock-chips.com> In-Reply-To: <5617A589.4090102@rock-chips.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/09/2015 01:31 PM, Shawn Lin wrote: > 在 2015/10/8 16:31, Lars-Peter Clausen 写道: >> On 10/06/2015 11:21 AM, Shawn Lin wrote: >>> Hi Vinod, >>> >>> On 2015/10/5 23:37, Vinod Koul wrote: >>>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 07:48:59AM +0800, Shawn Lin wrote: >>>>> Add dmaengine_get_quirks API for peripheral devices to query >>>>> quirks if they need it to make special workaround due to broken >>>>> dma controller design. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Shawn Lin >>>>> --- >>>>> >>>>> Changes in v5: None >>>>> Changes in v4: None >>>>> Changes in v3: None >>>>> Changes in v2: None >>>>> Changes in v1: None >>>>> >>>>> include/linux/dmaengine.h | 9 +++++++++ >>>>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/dmaengine.h b/include/linux/dmaengine.h >>>>> index e2f5eb4..5174ca4 100644 >>>>> --- a/include/linux/dmaengine.h >>>>> +++ b/include/linux/dmaengine.h >>>>> @@ -704,6 +704,7 @@ struct dma_device { >>>>> >>>>> int (*device_config)(struct dma_chan *chan, >>>>> struct dma_slave_config *config); >>>>> + int (*device_get_quirks)(struct dma_chan *chan); >>>> >>>> And why do we want to expose this to users? THis doesnt seem right! >>>> >>> >>> Basically I agree not to expose dma's quirk to slave controllers...But, the >>> fact I mentioned on cover letter explain the reasons why I have to let slave >>> controllers know that they are working with a broken dma. It's a dilemma >>> that if we don't want that to be exposed(let slave controllers' driver get >>> the info via a API), we have t add broken quirk for all of them ,here and >>> there, which seems to be a disaster:( >> >> The problem with this API is that it transports values with device specific >> meanings over a generic API. Which is generally speaking not a good idea >> because the consumer witch is supposed to be generic suddenly needs to know >> which provider it is talking to. >> >> A better solution in this case typically is either introduce a generic API >> with generic values or a custom API with custom values, but don't mix the >> two. >> >>> >>> I would appreciate it if you could give me some suggestions at your earliest >>> convenience. :) >> >> In this case I think the best way to handle this is not quirks, but rather >> expose the actual maximum burst size using the DMA capabilities API. Since >> supporting only a certain burst depth is not really a quirk. All hardware >> has a limit for this and for some it might be larger or smaller than for >> others and it might be the same IP core but the maximum size depends on some >> IP core parameters. So this should be discoverable. >> > > Hi Lars, > > Thanks for looking for that. > > It's a good idea if all clients of the Soc are broken, but unfortunately > some of them work. So... max burst shoule be different for individuals. Well, the dma_get_slave_caps() API works on a DMA channel, so I don't think this will be a problem. - Lars