From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Ujfalusi Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] dmaengine:omap-dma: Linked List transfer for slave_sg Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 15:30:17 +0300 Message-ID: <2c542d87-3fd6-62db-1e37-159b673f6dc2@ti.com> References: <20160714124242.7579-1-peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> <20160718103137.GG5783@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <5c538963-ae46-54fc-27bf-dbae81443215@ti.com> <20160718122125.GJ5783@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160718122125.GJ5783@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: vinod.koul@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dmaengine@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, tony@atomide.com List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On 07/18/16 15:21, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 03:07:57PM +0300, Peter Ujfalusi wrote: >> I was not aware of any position on this from TI - as I mentioned I w= as not >> involved with DMA. It could be that the position from 'TI' is still = what it >> was. Or changed. But as I have been asked to look after TI DMA drive= rs >> upstream and I believe that the linked list mode is a good thing to = have - >> which is backed by my experiences. My position is that linked list s= upport is >> cool. >=20 > That's really nice news. Nothing like asking the author first whethe= r > he'd like to pass over maintainership of the driver. I guess you won= 't > mind if at some point in the future, I decide to just take it back... I work with the DMA drivers on behalf of TI. Inside TI the DMA related = queries are targeted at me. This does not change the maintainer of the drivers = upstream. --=20 P=E9ter