Re: [PATCH 8/9] arm: twr-k70f120m: extend Freescale eDMA driver with ability to support Kinetis SoC

Paul Osmialowski
2015-06-24T17:43:38Z

Hi Vinod,

Tanks for your comments. Actually, fsl-lpuart driver is done the way you
propose to rework this one. I'll consider this during my work on the
second iteration.

On Wed, 24 Jun 2015, Vinod Koul wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 11:19:46PM +0200, Paul Osmialowski wrote:
>> Surprisingly small amount of work was required in order to extend already
>> existing eDMA driver with the support for Kinetis SoC architecture.
>>
>> Note that <mach/memory.h> is needed (which is denoted by
>> CONFIG_NEED_MACH_MEMORY_H) as it provides macros required for proper
>> operation of DMA allocation functions.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Paul Osmialowski <pawelo@king.net.pl>
>> ---
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/fsl-edma.txt | 38 +++++++++-
>> arch/arm/Kconfig | 4 ++
>> arch/arm/boot/dts/kinetis.dtsi | 34 +++++++++
>> arch/arm/mach-kinetis/include/mach/memory.h | 61 ++++++++++++++++
>> drivers/clk/clk-kinetis.c | 15 ++++
>> drivers/dma/fsl-edma.c | 81 +++++++++++++++++++++-
>> include/dt-bindings/clock/kinetis-mcg.h | 5 +-
> having so many change into one patch is not a great idea, please breka them
> up. I am looking for single/multiple patches which only touch dmaengine
> files
>
>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_KINETIS
>> +static const char * const txirq_names[] = {
>> + "edma-tx-0,16",
>> + "edma-tx-1,17",
>> + "edma-tx-2,18",
>> + "edma-tx-3,19",
>> + "edma-tx-4,20",
>> + "edma-tx-5,21",
>> + "edma-tx-6,22",
>> + "edma-tx-7,23",
>> + "edma-tx-8,24",
>> + "edma-tx-9,25",
>> + "edma-tx-10,26",
>> + "edma-tx-11,27",
>> + "edma-tx-12,28",
>> + "edma-tx-13,29",
>> + "edma-tx-14,30",
>> + "edma-tx-15,31",
>> +};
> why do we need this array, these seem to come from DT, right?
>> +#endif
>> +
>> struct fsl_edma_engine {
>> struct dma_device dma_dev;
>> void __iomem *membase;
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_KINETIS
>> + struct clk *clk;
>> +#endif
>> void __iomem *muxbase[DMAMUX_NR];
>> struct clk *muxclk[DMAMUX_NR];
>> struct mutex fsl_edma_mutex;
>> u32 n_chans;
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_KINETIS
>> + int txirq[ARRAY_SIZE(txirq_names)];
>> +#else
>> int txirq;
>> +#endif
>> int errirq;
>> bool big_endian;
>> struct fsl_edma_chan chans[];
> we can define these bits and only be used on kinetis machines?
>
>> @@ -709,6 +737,7 @@ static irqreturn_t fsl_edma_err_handler(int irq, void *dev_id)
>> return IRQ_HANDLED;
>> }
>>
>> +#ifndef CONFIG_ARCH_KINETIS
>> static irqreturn_t fsl_edma_irq_handler(int irq, void *dev_id)
>> {
>> if (fsl_edma_tx_handler(irq, dev_id) == IRQ_HANDLED)
>> @@ -716,6 +745,7 @@ static irqreturn_t fsl_edma_irq_handler(int irq, void *dev_id)
>>
>> return fsl_edma_err_handler(irq, dev_id);
>> }
>> +#endif
>>
>> static void fsl_edma_issue_pending(struct dma_chan *chan)
>> {
>> @@ -788,15 +818,29 @@ static void fsl_edma_free_chan_resources(struct dma_chan *chan)
>> }
>>
>> static int
>> -fsl_edma_irq_init(struct platform_device *pdev, struct fsl_edma_engine *fsl_edma)
>> +fsl_edma_irq_init(struct platform_device *pdev,
>> + struct fsl_edma_engine *fsl_edma)
>> {
>> int ret;
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_KINETIS
>> + int i;
>>
>> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(txirq_names); i++) {
>> + fsl_edma->txirq[i] = platform_get_irq_byname(pdev,
>> + txirq_names[i]);
>> + if (fsl_edma->txirq[i] < 0) {
>> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Can't get %s irq.\n",
>> + txirq_names[i]);
>> + return fsl_edma->txirq[i];
>> + }
>> + }
>> +#else
>> fsl_edma->txirq = platform_get_irq_byname(pdev, "edma-tx");
>> if (fsl_edma->txirq < 0) {
>> dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Can't get edma-tx irq.\n");
>> return fsl_edma->txirq;
>> }
>> +#endif
> can you have two routines and with one of them onvoked based on machine type
> which should be configured based on DT data rather
>
>>
>> fsl_edma->errirq = platform_get_irq_byname(pdev, "edma-err");
>> if (fsl_edma->errirq < 0) {
>> @@ -804,6 +848,16 @@ fsl_edma_irq_init(struct platform_device *pdev, struct fsl_edma_engine *fsl_edma
>> return fsl_edma->errirq;
>> }
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_KINETIS
>> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(txirq_names); i++) {
>> + ret = devm_request_irq(&pdev->dev, fsl_edma->txirq[i],
>> + fsl_edma_tx_handler, 0, txirq_names[i], fsl_edma);
>> + if (ret) {
>> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Can't register eDMA tx IRQ.\n");
>> + return ret;
>> + }
>> + }
>> +#else
>> if (fsl_edma->txirq == fsl_edma->errirq) {
>> ret = devm_request_irq(&pdev->dev, fsl_edma->txirq,
>> fsl_edma_irq_handler, 0, "eDMA", fsl_edma);
>> @@ -818,6 +872,7 @@ fsl_edma_irq_init(struct platform_device *pdev, struct fsl_edma_engine *fsl_edma
>> dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Can't register eDMA tx IRQ.\n");
>> return ret;
>> }
>> +#endif
> only one of them will be populated so if-else should work too
>
> please get rid of these ifdef stuff and make it based on DT data based flags
>
> --
> ~Vinod
>