From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 20:40:49 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 1/5] dmaengine: dw_dmac: move to generic DMA binding In-Reply-To: <20130129174546.GE23505@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1359395857-1235-1-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de> <201301291636.38773.arnd@arndb.de> <20130129174546.GE23505@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <201301292040.50143.arnd@arndb.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tuesday 29 January 2013, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > Well, how it all works in the PL08x driver at present is: Thanks for the explanations. If I end up implementing the DT support for pl08x, this will be very helpful. I looked at the git history for mach-versatile and could not find any of it there, although the patches were certainly on the mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2010-June/017818.html Do you (or Linus) know what happened to the patch series? Based on your description, it sounds all doable, but the split between platform specific code and device driver code would be different: While the muxing that you describe all takes place in the get_signal/put_signal functions in platform code, doing a proper DT binding for the mux would imply moving that into the pl080 driver itself, at least as a compile-time option for the driver. Do you think that would be acceptable? While I guess we could still keep the get_signal/put_signal callbacks in mach-versatile but drop them for platforms without a mux, I'm not sure if that would make the overall driver better or worse. Arnd From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] dmaengine: dw_dmac: move to generic DMA binding Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 20:40:49 +0000 Message-ID: <201301292040.50143.arnd@arndb.de> References: <1359395857-1235-1-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de> <201301291636.38773.arnd@arndb.de> <20130129174546.GE23505@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130129174546.GE23505-l+eeeJia6m9vn6HldHNs0ANdhmdF6hFW@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org Sender: "devicetree-discuss" To: Russell King - ARM Linux , Linus Walleij Cc: Vinod Koul , Viresh Kumar , devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org, spear-devel , Andy Shevchenko , linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 29 January 2013, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > Well, how it all works in the PL08x driver at present is: Thanks for the explanations. If I end up implementing the DT support for pl08x, this will be very helpful. I looked at the git history for mach-versatile and could not find any of it there, although the patches were certainly on the mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2010-June/017818.html Do you (or Linus) know what happened to the patch series? Based on your description, it sounds all doable, but the split between platform specific code and device driver code would be different: While the muxing that you describe all takes place in the get_signal/put_signal functions in platform code, doing a proper DT binding for the mux would imply moving that into the pl080 driver itself, at least as a compile-time option for the driver. Do you think that would be acceptable? While I guess we could still keep the get_signal/put_signal callbacks in mach-versatile but drop them for platforms without a mux, I'm not sure if that would make the overall driver better or worse. Arnd