From: robert.jarzmik@free.fr (Robert Jarzmik)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 4/4] dmaengine: pxa_dma: fix the maximum requestor line
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 18:24:57 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87fuwt28eu.fsf@belgarion.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160215163524.GI19598@localhost> (Vinod Koul's message of "Mon, 15 Feb 2016 22:05:24 +0530")
Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com> writes:
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 10:23:18PM +0100, Robert Jarzmik wrote:
>> @@ -1399,13 +1405,17 @@ static int pxad_probe(struct platform_device *op)
>> return PTR_ERR(pdev->base);
>>
>> of_id = of_match_device(pxad_dt_ids, &op->dev);
>> - if (of_id)
>> + if (of_id) {
>> of_property_read_u32(op->dev.of_node, "#dma-channels",
>> &dma_channels);
>> - else if (pdata && pdata->dma_channels)
>> + of_property_read_u32(op->dev.of_node, "#requestors",
>> + &nb_requestors);
>
> I think we should check the return value here. This might be err in case
> when we have older DT on platform, but still should work with default in
> that case
Okay, but how should the code react to the err case, more specifically to
-EINVAL or -ENODATA ? As this property is optional as per the device-tree
description, the current code leaves nb_requestors = 0, as is specified in the
description, and fits the mmp_pdma case.
What do you think should be done ? A warning message ? Something else ?
Cheers.
--
Robert
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr>
To: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org>,
Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org>,
Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@gmail.com>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, dmaengine@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] dmaengine: pxa_dma: fix the maximum requestor line
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 18:24:57 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87fuwt28eu.fsf@belgarion.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160215163524.GI19598@localhost> (Vinod Koul's message of "Mon, 15 Feb 2016 22:05:24 +0530")
Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com> writes:
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 10:23:18PM +0100, Robert Jarzmik wrote:
>> @@ -1399,13 +1405,17 @@ static int pxad_probe(struct platform_device *op)
>> return PTR_ERR(pdev->base);
>>
>> of_id = of_match_device(pxad_dt_ids, &op->dev);
>> - if (of_id)
>> + if (of_id) {
>> of_property_read_u32(op->dev.of_node, "#dma-channels",
>> &dma_channels);
>> - else if (pdata && pdata->dma_channels)
>> + of_property_read_u32(op->dev.of_node, "#requestors",
>> + &nb_requestors);
>
> I think we should check the return value here. This might be err in case
> when we have older DT on platform, but still should work with default in
> that case
Okay, but how should the code react to the err case, more specifically to
-EINVAL or -ENODATA ? As this property is optional as per the device-tree
description, the current code leaves nb_requestors = 0, as is specified in the
description, and fits the mmp_pdma case.
What do you think should be done ? A warning message ? Something else ?
Cheers.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr>
To: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org>,
Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org>,
Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@gmail.com>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, dmaengine@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] dmaengine: pxa_dma: fix the maximum requestor line
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 18:24:57 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87fuwt28eu.fsf@belgarion.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160215163524.GI19598@localhost> (Vinod Koul's message of "Mon, 15 Feb 2016 22:05:24 +0530")
Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com> writes:
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 10:23:18PM +0100, Robert Jarzmik wrote:
>> @@ -1399,13 +1405,17 @@ static int pxad_probe(struct platform_device *op)
>> return PTR_ERR(pdev->base);
>>
>> of_id = of_match_device(pxad_dt_ids, &op->dev);
>> - if (of_id)
>> + if (of_id) {
>> of_property_read_u32(op->dev.of_node, "#dma-channels",
>> &dma_channels);
>> - else if (pdata && pdata->dma_channels)
>> + of_property_read_u32(op->dev.of_node, "#requestors",
>> + &nb_requestors);
>
> I think we should check the return value here. This might be err in case
> when we have older DT on platform, but still should work with default in
> that case
Okay, but how should the code react to the err case, more specifically to
-EINVAL or -ENODATA ? As this property is optional as per the device-tree
description, the current code leaves nb_requestors = 0, as is specified in the
description, and fits the mmp_pdma case.
What do you think should be done ? A warning message ? Something else ?
Cheers.
--
Robert
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-15 17:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-11 21:23 [PATCH 0/4] Fix pxa dma requestor lines Robert Jarzmik
2016-02-11 21:23 ` Robert Jarzmik
2016-02-11 21:23 ` Robert Jarzmik
2016-02-11 21:23 ` [PATCH 1/4] dma: mmp_pdma: Add the #requestors DT property documentation Robert Jarzmik
2016-02-11 21:23 ` Robert Jarzmik
2016-02-11 21:59 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-02-11 21:59 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-02-11 21:59 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-02-12 20:55 ` Robert Jarzmik
2016-02-12 20:55 ` Robert Jarzmik
2016-02-11 21:23 ` [PATCH 2/4] dmaengine: mmp-pdma: add number of requestors Robert Jarzmik
2016-02-11 21:23 ` Robert Jarzmik
2016-02-11 21:23 ` Robert Jarzmik
2016-02-11 21:23 ` [PATCH 3/4] ARM: pxa: add the number of DMA requestor lines Robert Jarzmik
2016-02-11 21:23 ` Robert Jarzmik
2016-02-11 21:23 ` Robert Jarzmik
2016-02-11 21:23 ` [PATCH 4/4] dmaengine: pxa_dma: fix the maximum requestor line Robert Jarzmik
2016-02-11 21:23 ` Robert Jarzmik
2016-02-15 16:35 ` Vinod Koul
2016-02-15 16:35 ` Vinod Koul
2016-02-15 16:35 ` Vinod Koul
2016-02-15 17:24 ` Robert Jarzmik [this message]
2016-02-15 17:24 ` Robert Jarzmik
2016-02-15 17:24 ` Robert Jarzmik
2016-02-15 17:33 ` Vinod Koul
2016-02-15 17:33 ` Vinod Koul
2016-02-15 17:33 ` Vinod Koul
2016-02-15 18:22 ` Robert Jarzmik
2016-02-15 18:22 ` Robert Jarzmik
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=87fuwt28eu.fsf@belgarion.home \
--to=robert.jarzmik@free.fr \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@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.