From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mika.westerberg@iki.fi (Mika Westerberg) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 20:28:53 +0300 Subject: [PATCH] ep93xx: Implement double buffering for M2M DMA channels In-Reply-To: References: <4F683B36.8090101@metasoft.pl> <20120321193836.GC3740@mwesterb-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com> <20120323070446.GC5812@mwesterb-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com> Message-ID: <20120410172853.GA25697@mwesterb-mobl> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:09:50AM -0500, H Hartley Sweeten wrote: > On Friday, March 23, 2012 12:05 AM, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 09:19:10PM -0500, H Hartley Sweeten wrote: > > > >> Did you test this patch or just review it? > > > > I tested and reviewed it. > > OK. What kernel? My tests so far have been with 3.3. > > >> On my system it doesn't work. I think it has something to do with the > >> changes to m2m_hw_interrupt but I haven't tracked it down yet. > >> > >> It looks like what's missing is a: > >> > >> edmac->edma->hw_submit(edmac); > >> > >> But, maybe that's not needed with double buffering? > > > > Did you try without your patch and adding my VIC hack? That's what I did when > > I first got this patch and I saw no problems. I tested with audio (M2P), > > mmc_spi (M2M) and dmatest (M2M). > > No, I have not applied your VIC hack. > > Until we get a working solution, without any hacks, I don't want this to go in. Now that the spurious interrupts thing with VIC has been sorted out, should we revisit this patch? Hartley, do you have any objections merging this?