From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D4FBC369C9 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 2025 17:19:34 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Subject:CC:To: From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=lcYeM8YddgGy0Co6PLjjbrNoOflTVmZ7V8icjLa1578=; b=4UlsF7w5dT5yvdMJ5DtYrEBSOQ Cz+Iaa8SI5jgoGaoAdh/1f5s3SVswXaS6yyB2XdkerY7dNuZzun2jAvkaNMolaI5Qc9ndQsNCcAYh yGSC6X7ypTpRoBD/jVTDHWkhHuhLohnHGJVREJnRO+cFehbAKTlBSOMEkEZOiKu3FpFdjt1bAQGfb A0mhQdHdWM2/WjfZLgkB922U5FxcT5MisAmSLxavcl7CYRERNIuF2oRQwIAU9L205D6UX8Gh8ygut S4vNfr8bc+gJUkz5KyFK2hPo3BUxEHaAfrJNfnnCgwWwthhQzA6UichmOjRSCWnaNknYQAQ98EwtC E/Jkpzuw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1u5StY-0000000DozI-1eL6; Thu, 17 Apr 2025 17:19:24 +0000 Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com ([185.176.79.56]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1u5Si6-0000000DmIW-39m5 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 17 Apr 2025 17:07:36 +0000 Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.18.186.231]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4Zdkjl0nrbz6K9K2; Fri, 18 Apr 2025 01:03:07 +0800 (CST) Received: from frapeml500008.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.182.85.71]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A57A3140145; Fri, 18 Apr 2025 01:07:24 +0800 (CST) Received: from localhost (10.203.177.66) by frapeml500008.china.huawei.com (7.182.85.71) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2507.39; Thu, 17 Apr 2025 19:07:24 +0200 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2025 18:07:22 +0100 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Robin Murphy CC: , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] dmaengine: Add Arm DMA-350 driver Message-ID: <20250417180722.00002465@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <6d7d8efefa935d34977b59a74797ab377528db94.1741780808.git.robin.murphy@arm.com> References: <6d7d8efefa935d34977b59a74797ab377528db94.1741780808.git.robin.murphy@arm.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.3.0 (GTK 3.24.42; x86_64-w64-mingw32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.203.177.66] X-ClientProxiedBy: lhrpeml100001.china.huawei.com (7.191.160.183) To frapeml500008.china.huawei.com (7.182.85.71) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20250417_100734_935774_7C3D71A0 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 13.40 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Wed, 12 Mar 2025 12:05:10 +0000 Robin Murphy wrote: > Add an initial driver for the Arm Corelink DMA-350 controller, to > support basic mem-to-mem async_tx. The design here leaves room for more > fun things like peripheral support and scatter-gather chaining to come > in future. > > Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy > --- > v2: > - Fix build warnings > - Limit retries for reading live residue Drive by review as I was curious... Few things inline but it's been too long since I last looked at a DMA driver to give a detailed review. Jonathan > + > +static int d350_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > +{ > + > + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, dmac); If you used the managed form of register, I don't think you need this? > + > + ret = dma_async_device_register(&dmac->dma); This is pretty noisy on most non -ENOMEM errors anyway. Is it worth another layer of error print? > + if (ret) > + return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to register DMA device\n"); > + > + return 0; > +} > + > +static void d350_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > +{ > + struct d350 *dmac = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); > + > + dma_async_device_unregister(&dmac->dma); dmaenginem_async_device_register() and get rid of remove. J > +}