All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Zhao <rizhao@nvidia.com>
To: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"vinod.koul@intel.com" <vinod.koul@intel.com>,
	"djbw@fb.com" <djbw@fb.com>,
	"grant.likely@linaro.org" <grant.likely@linaro.org>,
	"rob.herring@calxeda.com" <rob.herring@calxeda.com>,
	"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] DMA: add help function to check whether dma controller registered
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 09:17:38 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130823011738.GA17925@rizhao-lap> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52167665.90602@wwwdotorg.org>

On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 04:36:53AM +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 08/22/2013 12:43 AM, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > DMA client device driver usually needs to know at probe time whether
> > dma controller has been registered to deffer probe. So add a help
> > function of_dma_check_controller.
> > 
> > DMA request channel functions can also used to check it, but they
> > are usually called at open() time.
> 
> This new function is almost identical to the existing
> of_dma_request_slave_channel(). Surely the code should be shared?
ofdma->of_dma_xlate(&dma_spec, ofdma);
The above is called holding of_dma_lock. If I want to abstract the
common lines, there' two options.

Option 1:
static struct of_dma* of_dma_check_controller_locked(np, name)
{
	parameter check
	get dma-names count and check return value
	for loop to get of_dma
	return PTR_ERR(err) or of_dma
}

struct dma_chan *of_dma_request_slave_channel(struct device_node *np,
					      const char *name)
{
	chan = null;
	mutex_lock(&of_dma_lock);
	of_dma = of_dma_check_controller_locked(np, name)
	if(!IS_ERR(of_dma))
		chan = ofdma->of_dma_xlate(&dma_spec, ofdma);
	mutex_unlock(&of_dma_lock);
	return chan;
}

int of_dma_check_controller(struct device *dev, const char *name)
{
	mutex_lock(&of_dma_lock);
	ofdma = of_dma_check_controller_locked(dev->of_node, name);
	mutex_unlock(&of_dma_lock);
	if (IS_ERR(ofdma))
		return ERR_PTR(ofdma);
	else
		return 0;
}

Option 2:
static struct of_dma* of_dma_check_controller_getlock(np, name)
{
	parameter check
	get dma-names count and check return value
	for loop to get of_dma, get lock at old place
	if failed, unlock.
	return PTR_ERR(err) or of_dma
}

struct dma_chan *of_dma_request_slave_channel(struct device_node *np,
					      const char *name)
{
}	of_dma = of_dma_check_controller_getlock(np, name)
	if(!IS_ERR(of_dma)) {
		chan = ofdma->of_dma_xlate(&dma_spec, ofdma);
		unlock;
	}
	return chan;
}

int of_dma_check_controller(struct device *dev, const char *name)
	ofdma = of_dma_check_controller_locked(dev->of_node, name);

	if (IS_ERR(ofdma)) {
		return ERR_PTR(ofdma);
	} else {
		unlock;
		return 0;
	}
}

> But that said, I don't see any need for a new function; why can't
> drivers simply call of_dma_request_slave_channel() at probe time;
It'll mislead user. channel supposed to be request at open time.

> from
> what I can see, that function doesn't actually request the channel, but
> rather simply looks it up, just like this one. The only difference is
> that of_dma_xlate() is also called, but that's just doing some data
> transformation, not actually recording channel ownership.
xlate function request the channel if things go well.

Thanks
Richard

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: rizhao@nvidia.com (Richard Zhao)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] DMA: add help function to check whether dma controller registered
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 09:17:38 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130823011738.GA17925@rizhao-lap> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52167665.90602@wwwdotorg.org>

On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 04:36:53AM +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 08/22/2013 12:43 AM, Richard Zhao wrote:
> > DMA client device driver usually needs to know at probe time whether
> > dma controller has been registered to deffer probe. So add a help
> > function of_dma_check_controller.
> > 
> > DMA request channel functions can also used to check it, but they
> > are usually called at open() time.
> 
> This new function is almost identical to the existing
> of_dma_request_slave_channel(). Surely the code should be shared?
ofdma->of_dma_xlate(&dma_spec, ofdma);
The above is called holding of_dma_lock. If I want to abstract the
common lines, there' two options.

Option 1:
static struct of_dma* of_dma_check_controller_locked(np, name)
{
	parameter check
	get dma-names count and check return value
	for loop to get of_dma
	return PTR_ERR(err) or of_dma
}

struct dma_chan *of_dma_request_slave_channel(struct device_node *np,
					      const char *name)
{
	chan = null;
	mutex_lock(&of_dma_lock);
	of_dma = of_dma_check_controller_locked(np, name)
	if(!IS_ERR(of_dma))
		chan = ofdma->of_dma_xlate(&dma_spec, ofdma);
	mutex_unlock(&of_dma_lock);
	return chan;
}

int of_dma_check_controller(struct device *dev, const char *name)
{
	mutex_lock(&of_dma_lock);
	ofdma = of_dma_check_controller_locked(dev->of_node, name);
	mutex_unlock(&of_dma_lock);
	if (IS_ERR(ofdma))
		return ERR_PTR(ofdma);
	else
		return 0;
}

Option 2:
static struct of_dma* of_dma_check_controller_getlock(np, name)
{
	parameter check
	get dma-names count and check return value
	for loop to get of_dma, get lock at old place
	if failed, unlock.
	return PTR_ERR(err) or of_dma
}

struct dma_chan *of_dma_request_slave_channel(struct device_node *np,
					      const char *name)
{
}	of_dma = of_dma_check_controller_getlock(np, name)
	if(!IS_ERR(of_dma)) {
		chan = ofdma->of_dma_xlate(&dma_spec, ofdma);
		unlock;
	}
	return chan;
}

int of_dma_check_controller(struct device *dev, const char *name)
	ofdma = of_dma_check_controller_locked(dev->of_node, name);

	if (IS_ERR(ofdma)) {
		return ERR_PTR(ofdma);
	} else {
		unlock;
		return 0;
	}
}

> But that said, I don't see any need for a new function; why can't
> drivers simply call of_dma_request_slave_channel() at probe time;
It'll mislead user. channel supposed to be request at open time.

> from
> what I can see, that function doesn't actually request the channel, but
> rather simply looks it up, just like this one. The only difference is
> that of_dma_xlate() is also called, but that's just doing some data
> transformation, not actually recording channel ownership.
xlate function request the channel if things go well.

Thanks
Richard

  reply	other threads:[~2013-08-23  1:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-08-02  6:04 [PATCH] DMA: add help function to check whether dma controller registered Richard Zhao
2013-08-02  6:04 ` Richard Zhao
2013-08-02 19:59 ` Stephen Warren
2013-08-02 19:59   ` Stephen Warren
2013-08-05  5:56   ` Richard Zhao
2013-08-05  5:56     ` Richard Zhao
2013-08-22  6:43 ` [PATCH v2] " Richard Zhao
2013-08-22  6:43   ` Richard Zhao
2013-08-22  6:43   ` Richard Zhao
2013-08-22 20:36   ` Stephen Warren
2013-08-22 20:36     ` Stephen Warren
2013-08-23  1:17     ` Richard Zhao [this message]
2013-08-23  1:17       ` Richard Zhao
2013-08-23 15:56       ` Stephen Warren
2013-08-23 15:56         ` Stephen Warren

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=20130823011738.GA17925@rizhao-lap \
    --to=rizhao@nvidia.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=djbw@fb.com \
    --cc=grant.likely@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rob.herring@calxeda.com \
    --cc=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
    --cc=vinod.koul@intel.com \
    /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.