From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com (Andy Shevchenko) Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 10:40:21 +0200 Subject: [PATCH V3 2/3] dmaengine: dw_dmac: Enhance device tree support In-Reply-To: References: <3100e691db3f94c22afd98b609a1568d7e70dfe7.1350360935.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> <169edae67b9a051ca7448e5b62c3cd2c5c1db470.1350360935.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> <201212102208.52347.arnd@arndb.de> Message-ID: <1355301621.31620.66.camel@smile> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, 2012-12-12 at 08:30 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > * It requires slave drivers to know that they are using the dw_dmac > > driver and pass a pointer to dw_generic_filter, which is not > > generic at all > > > > * It requires the dmac node to have information about all slaves > > > > There are also some minor issues, such as the naming of DT > > properties, but the above need to be resolved first. > > I saw the binding document and it looks it can be applied to dw_dmac > too, as there is nothing special for it. > > The question is how? We are already late for merge window and this > one is queued. Supplying a new patch, getting it reviewed/tested and > being pulled by Linus is not so easy :) > > Two ways: > - Keep it as is, and i will fix it separately and quickly > - Drop it :( Will we survive if the patch is in mainline? I mean how big the impact of it is? -- Andy Shevchenko Intel Finland Oy