From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: swarren@wwwdotorg.org (Stephen Warren) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 13:27:58 -0600 Subject: [PATCH 2/9] dma: tegra20-apbdma: move to generic device tree bindings In-Reply-To: <1374639002-16753-3-git-send-email-rizhao@nvidia.com> References: <1374639002-16753-1-git-send-email-rizhao@nvidia.com> <1374639002-16753-3-git-send-email-rizhao@nvidia.com> Message-ID: <51F2CDBE.40802@wwwdotorg.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org (Stripping the Cc list a lot) On 07/23/2013 10:09 PM, Richard Zhao wrote: > Update tegra20-apbdma driver to adopt generic DMA device tree bindings. > It calls of_dma_controller_register() with of_dma_simple_xlate to get > the generic DMA device tree helper support. The #dma-cells for apbdma > must be 1, which is slave ID. > > The existing nvidia,dma-request-selector still works there, and the > support will be removed after all clients get converted to generic DMA > device tree helper. (BTW, I would like to take this series through the Tegra tree to simplify dependencies. So, I'm looking for ack's on the drivers rather than for them to be applied. I had hoped Richard would point this out when posting the patches) > diff --git a/drivers/dma/tegra20-apb-dma.c b/drivers/dma/tegra20-apb-dma.c > +static bool tegra_dma_filter_fn(struct dma_chan *dc, void *param) > +{ > + if (dc->device->dev->driver == &tegra_dmac_driver.driver) { > + struct tegra_dma_channel *tdc = to_tegra_dma_chan(dc); > + unsigned req = *(unsigned *)param; > + > + tdc->slave_id = req; > + > + return true; > + } > + return false; > +} > + > +static struct of_dma_filter_info tegra_dma_info = { > + .filter_fn = tegra_dma_filter_fn, > +}; Why does this driver need to define a filter function? I thought the dmaengine's DT support would already match DMA clients/engines based on the phandle in DT? Isn't the need to pass the slave channel ID into drivers something pretty fundamental to dmaengine, and hence something it already supports?