From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com (Maxime Ripard) Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2014 15:31:25 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v5 00/61] dmaengine: Implement generic slave capabilities retrieval In-Reply-To: <20141208133047.GM16827@intel.com> References: <1416231775-31252-1-git-send-email-maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> <20141208061746.GD16827@intel.com> <20141208093246.GB27228@ldesroches-Latitude-E6320> <20141208133047.GM16827@intel.com> Message-ID: <20141208143125.GD8739@lukather> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 07:00:47PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 10:32:47AM +0100, Ludovic Desroches wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 11:47:46AM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 02:41:54PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > As we discussed a couple of weeks ago, this is the third attempt at > > > > creating a generic behaviour for slave capabilities retrieval so that > > > > generic layers using dmaengine can actually rely on that. > > > > > > > > That has been done mostly through two steps: by moving out the > > > > sub-commands of the device_control callback, so that the dmaengine > > > > core can then infer from that wether a sub-command is implemented, and > > > > then by moving the slave properties, such as the supported buswidth, > > > > to the structure dma_device itself. > > > > > > Okay managed to get this done. Apart from the two issues identified didn't > > > find anything so applied and pushed to a branch > > > "topic/slave_caps_device_control_fix" > > > > > > Today did some compile tests and found few warnings, were trivial but I > > > am worried about the testing of this code. Has anyone tested this, if so > > > which platforms are covered Since I pushed base branch last night, Feng's > > > bot covered it and all was OK. Looks like Feng's bot doesn't have wide > > > coverage of arm platforms, wasn't there one run by arm guys which tries to > > > test and boot, if so can we get this tested there please. > > > > Tested with your branch on sama5d3 and sama5d4 so at_hdmac and at xdmac. > > > > I have also sent some patches based on Maxime's series for at_xdmac. I did the development on the Allwinner A31 (sun6i driver). So that's tested too. Thanks to Ludovic for his testing. > Anymore voluteers? I am looking at omap, mxs, tegra ones (these had > issues) Since these were compile time issues (and trivial one). From a functional point of view, beside the warning introduced, this won't change anything. And even if it does, we have a full bug-fixing window to take care of that. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: