From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: sshtylyov@mvista.com (Sergei Shtylyov)
Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2013 23:49:11 +0300
Subject: [PATCH v7 01/10] ARM: davinci: move private EDMA API to arm/common
In-Reply-To: <20130201185820.GE29898@arwen.pp.htv.fi>
References: <1359742975-10421-1-git-send-email-mporter@ti.com>
 <1359742975-10421-2-git-send-email-mporter@ti.com>
 <5022f635a527470dbd0be932063e9cd2@DFLE72.ent.ti.com>
 <20130201184915.GP2244@beef> <510C1D0E.6030401@mvista.com>
 <20130201185820.GE29898@arwen.pp.htv.fi>
Message-ID: <510C2A47.1090607@mvista.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Hello.

On 02/01/2013 09:58 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:

>>>>> Move mach-davinci/dma.c to common/edma.c so it can be used
>>>>> by OMAP (specifically AM33xx) as well.

>>>> I think this should rather go to drivers/dma/?

>>> No, this is the private EDMA API. It's the analogous thing to
>>> the private OMAP dma API that is in plat-omap/dma.c. The actual
>>> dmaengine driver is in drivers/dma/edma.c as a wrapper around
>>> this...same way OMAP DMA engine conversion is being done.

>>   Keeps me wondering why we couldn't have the same with CPPI 4.1 when I proposed
>> that, instead of waiting indefinitely for TI to convert it to drivers/dma/
>> directly. We could have working MUSB DMA on OMAP-L1x/Sitara all this time... Sigh.

> good point, do you wanna send some patches ?

   I have already sent them countless times and even stuck CPPI 4.1 support (in
arch/arm/common/cppi41.c) in Russell's patch system. TI requested to remove the
patch. :-(

> I guess to make the MUSB side simpler we would need musb-dma-engine glue
> to map dmaengine to the private MUSB API. Then we would have some
> starting point to also move inventra (and anybody else) to dmaengine
> API.

   Why? Inventra is a dedicated device's private DMA controller, why make
universal DMA driver for it?

> Once that's done, we drop MUSB's private API.

   Don't think it's a good idea.

WBR, Sergei