All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com (Andy Shevchenko)
To: linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] dmaengine: DW DMAC: split pdata to hardware properties and platform quirks
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 18:55:08 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1477583708.5295.35.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1477582497-19302-1-git-send-email-Eugeniy.Paltsev@synopsys.com>

On Thu, 2016-10-27@18:34 +0300, Eugeniy Paltsev wrote:
> This patch is to address a proposal by Andy in this thread:
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/dmaengine/msg11506.html
> Split platform data to actual hardware properties, and platform
> quirks.
> Now we able to use quirks and hardware properties separately from
> different sources (pdata, device tree or autoconfig registers)
> 

Thanks for an update, my comments below.

> ---
> Changes for v2:
> ???- use separate bool values for quirks in "dw_dma_platform_data"
> instead of
> ?????common bit field.

> ???- convert device tree properties reading to unified device property
> API.

This should be a separate patch.

> 
> I was wrong about DW_DMA_IS_SOFT_LLP flag - it is used to check about
> ongoing soft llp transfer. So DW_DMA_IS_SOFT_LLP flag and "dwc-
> >nollp"?
> variable have different functions and I couldn't just get rid of "dwc-
> >nollp"
> and use DW_DMA_IS_SOFT_LLP flag instead. So I left "dwc->nollp"
> untouched.

So, then perhaps we may convert it to another flag let's say
DW_DMA_IS_LLP_SUPPORTED.

But this is other story independent of the subject.

> --- a/drivers/dma/dw/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma/dw/core.c
> @@ -1452,9 +1452,24 @@ int dw_dma_probe(struct dw_dma_chip *chip)
> ?	dw->regs = chip->regs;
> ?	chip->dw = dw;
> ?
> +	/* Reassign the platform data pointer */
> +	pdata = dw->pdata;
> +
> ?	pm_runtime_get_sync(chip->dev);
> ?
> -	if (!chip->pdata) {
> +	if ((!chip->pdata) || (chip->pdata && chip->pdata-
> >only_quirks_used)) {

It's simple as
if (!chip->pdata || chip->pdata->only_quirks_used)

> +		if (!chip->pdata) {
> +			/*
> +			?* Fill quirks with the default values in
> case of
> +			?* pdata absence.
> +			?*/
> +			pdata->is_private = true;
> +			pdata->is_memcpy = true;
> +		} else {
> +			pdata->is_private = chip->pdata->is_private;
> +			pdata->is_memcpy = chip->pdata->is_memcpy;
> +		}

Would we leave the first part in the place it is now and add new piece
after?

> +
> ?		dw_params = dma_readl(dw, DW_PARAMS);
> ?		dev_dbg(chip->dev, "DW_PARAMS: 0x%08x\n", dw_params);
> ?
> @@ -1464,9 +1479,6 @@ int dw_dma_probe(struct dw_dma_chip *chip)
> ?			goto err_pdata;
> ?		}
> ?
> -		/* Reassign the platform data pointer */
> -		pdata = dw->pdata;
> -
> ?		/* Get hardware configuration parameters */
> ?		pdata->nr_channels = (dw_params >> DW_PARAMS_NR_CHAN
> & 7) + 1;
> ?		pdata->nr_masters = (dw_params >> DW_PARAMS_NR_MASTER
> & 3) + 1;
> @@ -1477,8 +1489,6 @@ int dw_dma_probe(struct dw_dma_chip *chip)
> ?		pdata->block_size = dma_readl(dw, MAX_BLK_SIZE);
> ?
> ?		/* Fill platform data with the default values */
> -		pdata->is_private = true;
> -		pdata->is_memcpy = true;
> ?		pdata->chan_allocation_order =
> CHAN_ALLOCATION_ASCENDING;
> ?		pdata->chan_priority = CHAN_PRIORITY_ASCENDING;

...like

/* Apply platform defined quirks */
if (chip->data && chip->data->only_quirks_used) {
 ...
}


> -	if (of_property_read_u32(np, "dma-channels", &nr_channels))
> -		return NULL;
> +	if (device_property_read_bool(dev, "is-private"))

As I mentioned above, please do a separate patch for this.

> @@ -183,7 +186,7 @@ static int dw_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> ?
> ?	pdata = dev_get_platdata(dev);
> ?	if (!pdata)
> -		pdata = dw_dma_parse_dt(pdev);
> +		pdata = dw_dma_parse_dt(dev);

Perhaps you might rename the function to something like

dw_dma_parse_properties(dev);

> + * @only_quirks_used: Only read quirks (like "is_private" or
> "is_memcpy") from
> + *	platform data structure. Read other parameters from device
> tree
> + *	node (if exists) or from hardware autoconfig registers.

Can you somehow be more clear that all listed quirks will be copied from
platform data.

> ? * @is_nollp: The device channels does not support multi block
> transfers.
> ? * @chan_allocation_order: Allocate channels starting from 0 or 7
> ? * @chan_priority: Set channel priority increasing from 0 to 7 or 7
> to 0.
> @@ -52,6 +55,7 @@ struct dw_dma_platform_data {
> ?	unsigned int	nr_channels;
> ?	bool		is_private;
> ?	bool		is_memcpy;

> +	bool		only_quirks_used;

Perhaps add if at the end of quirk list and name just?

> ?	bool		is_nollp;

...here

bool use_quirks;

> ?#define CHAN_ALLOCATION_ASCENDING	0	/* zero to seven */
> ?#define CHAN_ALLOCATION_DESCENDING	1	/* seven to zero
> */

-- 
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko at linux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: Eugeniy Paltsev <Eugeniy.Paltsev@synopsys.com>,
	dmaengine@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vinod.koul@intel.com,
	dan.j.williams@intel.com, vireshk@kernel.org,
	linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] dmaengine: DW DMAC: split pdata to hardware properties and platform quirks
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 18:55:08 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1477583708.5295.35.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1477582497-19302-1-git-send-email-Eugeniy.Paltsev@synopsys.com>

On Thu, 2016-10-27 at 18:34 +0300, Eugeniy Paltsev wrote:
> This patch is to address a proposal by Andy in this thread:
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/dmaengine/msg11506.html
> Split platform data to actual hardware properties, and platform
> quirks.
> Now we able to use quirks and hardware properties separately from
> different sources (pdata, device tree or autoconfig registers)
> 

Thanks for an update, my comments below.

> ---
> Changes for v2:
>    - use separate bool values for quirks in "dw_dma_platform_data"
> instead of
>      common bit field.

>    - convert device tree properties reading to unified device property
> API.

This should be a separate patch.

> 
> I was wrong about DW_DMA_IS_SOFT_LLP flag - it is used to check about
> ongoing soft llp transfer. So DW_DMA_IS_SOFT_LLP flag and "dwc-
> >nollp" 
> variable have different functions and I couldn't just get rid of "dwc-
> >nollp"
> and use DW_DMA_IS_SOFT_LLP flag instead. So I left "dwc->nollp"
> untouched.

So, then perhaps we may convert it to another flag let's say
DW_DMA_IS_LLP_SUPPORTED.

But this is other story independent of the subject.

> --- a/drivers/dma/dw/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma/dw/core.c
> @@ -1452,9 +1452,24 @@ int dw_dma_probe(struct dw_dma_chip *chip)
>  	dw->regs = chip->regs;
>  	chip->dw = dw;
>  
> +	/* Reassign the platform data pointer */
> +	pdata = dw->pdata;
> +
>  	pm_runtime_get_sync(chip->dev);
>  
> -	if (!chip->pdata) {
> +	if ((!chip->pdata) || (chip->pdata && chip->pdata-
> >only_quirks_used)) {

It's simple as
if (!chip->pdata || chip->pdata->only_quirks_used)

> +		if (!chip->pdata) {
> +			/*
> +			 * Fill quirks with the default values in
> case of
> +			 * pdata absence.
> +			 */
> +			pdata->is_private = true;
> +			pdata->is_memcpy = true;
> +		} else {
> +			pdata->is_private = chip->pdata->is_private;
> +			pdata->is_memcpy = chip->pdata->is_memcpy;
> +		}

Would we leave the first part in the place it is now and add new piece
after?

> +
>  		dw_params = dma_readl(dw, DW_PARAMS);
>  		dev_dbg(chip->dev, "DW_PARAMS: 0x%08x\n", dw_params);
>  
> @@ -1464,9 +1479,6 @@ int dw_dma_probe(struct dw_dma_chip *chip)
>  			goto err_pdata;
>  		}
>  
> -		/* Reassign the platform data pointer */
> -		pdata = dw->pdata;
> -
>  		/* Get hardware configuration parameters */
>  		pdata->nr_channels = (dw_params >> DW_PARAMS_NR_CHAN
> & 7) + 1;
>  		pdata->nr_masters = (dw_params >> DW_PARAMS_NR_MASTER
> & 3) + 1;
> @@ -1477,8 +1489,6 @@ int dw_dma_probe(struct dw_dma_chip *chip)
>  		pdata->block_size = dma_readl(dw, MAX_BLK_SIZE);
>  
>  		/* Fill platform data with the default values */
> -		pdata->is_private = true;
> -		pdata->is_memcpy = true;
>  		pdata->chan_allocation_order =
> CHAN_ALLOCATION_ASCENDING;
>  		pdata->chan_priority = CHAN_PRIORITY_ASCENDING;

...like

/* Apply platform defined quirks */
if (chip->data && chip->data->only_quirks_used) {
 ...
}


> -	if (of_property_read_u32(np, "dma-channels", &nr_channels))
> -		return NULL;
> +	if (device_property_read_bool(dev, "is-private"))

As I mentioned above, please do a separate patch for this.

> @@ -183,7 +186,7 @@ static int dw_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  
>  	pdata = dev_get_platdata(dev);
>  	if (!pdata)
> -		pdata = dw_dma_parse_dt(pdev);
> +		pdata = dw_dma_parse_dt(dev);

Perhaps you might rename the function to something like

dw_dma_parse_properties(dev);

> + * @only_quirks_used: Only read quirks (like "is_private" or
> "is_memcpy") from
> + *	platform data structure. Read other parameters from device
> tree
> + *	node (if exists) or from hardware autoconfig registers.

Can you somehow be more clear that all listed quirks will be copied from
platform data.

>   * @is_nollp: The device channels does not support multi block
> transfers.
>   * @chan_allocation_order: Allocate channels starting from 0 or 7
>   * @chan_priority: Set channel priority increasing from 0 to 7 or 7
> to 0.
> @@ -52,6 +55,7 @@ struct dw_dma_platform_data {
>  	unsigned int	nr_channels;
>  	bool		is_private;
>  	bool		is_memcpy;

> +	bool		only_quirks_used;

Perhaps add if at the end of quirk list and name just 

>  	bool		is_nollp;

...here

bool use_quirks;

>  #define CHAN_ALLOCATION_ASCENDING	0	/* zero to seven */
>  #define CHAN_ALLOCATION_DESCENDING	1	/* seven to zero
> */

-- 
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy

  reply	other threads:[~2016-10-27 15:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-27 15:34 [PATCH v2] dmaengine: DW DMAC: split pdata to hardware properties and platform quirks Eugeniy Paltsev
2016-10-27 15:34 ` Eugeniy Paltsev
2016-10-27 15:55 ` Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2016-10-27 15:55   ` Andy Shevchenko

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1477583708.5295.35.camel@linux.intel.com \
    --to=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.