From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
To: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com>
Cc: <vkoul@kernel.org>, <ludovic.desroches@microchip.com>,
<eugen.hristev@microchip.com>, <linux-iio@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: at91-sama5d2_adc: Use dma_request_chan() instead dma_request_slave_channel()
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2019 15:50:01 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191223155001.3c4c7261@archlinux> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191217103100.21737-1-peter.ujfalusi@ti.com>
On Tue, 17 Dec 2019 12:31:00 +0200
Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> wrote:
> dma_request_slave_channel() is a wrapper on top of dma_request_chan()
> eating up the error code.
>
> By using dma_request_chan() directly the driver can support deferred
> probing against DMA.
Unfortunately that doesn't seem to be true.
The function in question returns void...
And for that matter is called only from the set_watermark callback which
doesn't run at probe time.
So if we were to get a deferred response at runtime there isn't a whole
lot we could do with it.
Jonathan
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com>
> ---
> Hi,
>
> Changes since v1:
> - Subject prefix is corrected to "iio: adc: at91-sama5d2_adc:"
>
> Regards,
> Peter
>
> drivers/iio/adc/at91-sama5d2_adc.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/at91-sama5d2_adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/at91-sama5d2_adc.c
> index e1850f3d5cf3..a5c7771227d5 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/adc/at91-sama5d2_adc.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/at91-sama5d2_adc.c
> @@ -1444,10 +1444,10 @@ static void at91_adc_dma_init(struct platform_device *pdev)
> if (st->dma_st.dma_chan)
> return;
>
> - st->dma_st.dma_chan = dma_request_slave_channel(&pdev->dev, "rx");
> -
> - if (!st->dma_st.dma_chan) {
> + st->dma_st.dma_chan = dma_request_chan(&pdev->dev, "rx");
> + if (IS_ERR(st->dma_st.dma_chan)) {
> dev_info(&pdev->dev, "can't get DMA channel\n");
> + st->dma_st.dma_chan = NULL;
> goto dma_exit;
> }
>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
To: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com>
Cc: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, ludovic.desroches@microchip.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vkoul@kernel.org,
eugen.hristev@microchip.com,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: at91-sama5d2_adc: Use dma_request_chan() instead dma_request_slave_channel()
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2019 15:50:01 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191223155001.3c4c7261@archlinux> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191217103100.21737-1-peter.ujfalusi@ti.com>
On Tue, 17 Dec 2019 12:31:00 +0200
Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> wrote:
> dma_request_slave_channel() is a wrapper on top of dma_request_chan()
> eating up the error code.
>
> By using dma_request_chan() directly the driver can support deferred
> probing against DMA.
Unfortunately that doesn't seem to be true.
The function in question returns void...
And for that matter is called only from the set_watermark callback which
doesn't run at probe time.
So if we were to get a deferred response at runtime there isn't a whole
lot we could do with it.
Jonathan
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com>
> ---
> Hi,
>
> Changes since v1:
> - Subject prefix is corrected to "iio: adc: at91-sama5d2_adc:"
>
> Regards,
> Peter
>
> drivers/iio/adc/at91-sama5d2_adc.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/at91-sama5d2_adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/at91-sama5d2_adc.c
> index e1850f3d5cf3..a5c7771227d5 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/adc/at91-sama5d2_adc.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/at91-sama5d2_adc.c
> @@ -1444,10 +1444,10 @@ static void at91_adc_dma_init(struct platform_device *pdev)
> if (st->dma_st.dma_chan)
> return;
>
> - st->dma_st.dma_chan = dma_request_slave_channel(&pdev->dev, "rx");
> -
> - if (!st->dma_st.dma_chan) {
> + st->dma_st.dma_chan = dma_request_chan(&pdev->dev, "rx");
> + if (IS_ERR(st->dma_st.dma_chan)) {
> dev_info(&pdev->dev, "can't get DMA channel\n");
> + st->dma_st.dma_chan = NULL;
> goto dma_exit;
> }
>
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-23 15:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-17 10:31 [PATCH v2] iio: adc: at91-sama5d2_adc: Use dma_request_chan() instead dma_request_slave_channel() Peter Ujfalusi
2019-12-17 10:31 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2019-12-23 15:50 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2019-12-23 15:50 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-12-23 22:02 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2019-12-23 22:02 ` Peter Ujfalusi
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=20191223155001.3c4c7261@archlinux \
--to=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=eugen.hristev@microchip.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ludovic.desroches@microchip.com \
--cc=peter.ujfalusi@ti.com \
--cc=vkoul@kernel.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.