From: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>,
Padma Venkat <padma.kvr@gmail.com>,
linux-samsung-soc <linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
Padmavathi Venna <padma.v@samsung.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
dmaengine@vger.kernel.org, Dylan Reid <dgreid@chromium.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dmaengine: pl330: Set residue in tx_status callback
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2014 11:40:03 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141209061003.GX16827@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141208142321.GE11285@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 02:23:21PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 06:37:27PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > I actually like the split model, you can also prepare txn ahead of time and
> > submit them when needed.
>
> Actually, you can't - that's not permitted. I have email(s) from Dan
> explicitly stating that it is permitted for a driver to take a spinlock
> in their prepare callback, and release it when the descriptor is
> submitted. Several DMA engine drivers (particularly those in for
> async_tx) do exactly that.
>
> The reason that submit is separate from prepare is to allow DMA engine
> users to set a callback - if it weren't for that, there wouldn't be a
> submit step, prepare would have done everything.
Yes thats right.
Do you mind pointing to thread Dan replied, I would like to add these bits
and anything else missing to Documentation
Thanks
--
~Vinod
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: vinod.koul@intel.com (Vinod Koul)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] dmaengine: pl330: Set residue in tx_status callback
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2014 11:40:03 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141209061003.GX16827@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141208142321.GE11285@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 02:23:21PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 06:37:27PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > I actually like the split model, you can also prepare txn ahead of time and
> > submit them when needed.
>
> Actually, you can't - that's not permitted. I have email(s) from Dan
> explicitly stating that it is permitted for a driver to take a spinlock
> in their prepare callback, and release it when the descriptor is
> submitted. Several DMA engine drivers (particularly those in for
> async_tx) do exactly that.
>
> The reason that submit is separate from prepare is to allow DMA engine
> users to set a callback - if it weren't for that, there wouldn't be a
> submit step, prepare would have done everything.
Yes thats right.
Do you mind pointing to thread Dan replied, I would like to add these bits
and anything else missing to Documentation
Thanks
--
~Vinod
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-09 6:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-26 9:44 [PATCH] dmaengine: pl330: Set residue in tx_status callback Padmavathi Venna
2014-11-26 9:44 ` Padmavathi Venna
2014-12-02 5:38 ` Padma Venkat
2014-12-02 5:38 ` Padma Venkat
2014-12-02 17:25 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2014-12-02 17:25 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2014-12-03 4:47 ` Padma Venkat
2014-12-03 4:47 ` Padma Venkat
2014-12-03 7:51 ` Jassi Brar
2014-12-03 7:51 ` Jassi Brar
2014-12-05 15:15 ` Vinod Koul
2014-12-05 15:15 ` Vinod Koul
2014-12-05 15:18 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-12-05 15:18 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-12-06 7:01 ` Jassi Brar
2014-12-06 7:01 ` Jassi Brar
2014-12-08 13:07 ` Vinod Koul
2014-12-08 13:07 ` Vinod Koul
2014-12-08 14:23 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-12-08 14:23 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-12-09 6:10 ` Vinod Koul [this message]
2014-12-09 6:10 ` Vinod Koul
2014-12-09 15:18 ` Jassi Brar
2014-12-09 15:18 ` Jassi Brar
2014-12-11 4:47 ` Vinod Koul
2014-12-11 4:47 ` Vinod Koul
2014-12-11 6:12 ` Jassi Brar
2014-12-11 6:12 ` Jassi Brar
2015-03-12 8:47 ` Jassi Brar
2015-03-12 8:47 ` Jassi Brar
2014-12-04 20:15 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2014-12-04 20:15 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2014-12-05 15:10 ` Vinod Koul
2014-12-05 15:10 ` Vinod Koul
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=20141209061003.GX16827@intel.com \
--to=vinod.koul@intel.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=dgreid@chromium.org \
--cc=dmaengine@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jaswinder.singh@linaro.org \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=padma.kvr@gmail.com \
--cc=padma.v@samsung.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.