From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sergei Shtylyov Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 17:39:28 +0000 Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH 1/6] dma: rcar-dma: add wait after stopping dma engine Message-Id: <560040D0.9050806@cogentembedded.com> List-Id: References: <1442776262-2503-2-git-send-email-hamzahfrq.sub@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1442776262-2503-2-git-send-email-hamzahfrq.sub@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-sh@vger.kernel.org Hello. On 09/21/2015 02:30 PM, Hamza Farooq wrote: >>> +#define NR_READS_TO_WAIT (5) /* number of times to check if DE = 0 */ >> >> Parens not needed. (I'm seeing this patchset for the first time.) > They prevent funny things from happening so I use them all the time. No, they don't in this case. > First time when I sent the patch-set, I had missed linux-sh mailing > list. > Here's the link from dmaengine mailing list in case you're interested > http://www.spinics.net/lists/dmaengine/msg06103.html Thanks for the link. >>> +static inline int rcar_dmac_wait_stop(struct rcar_dmac_chan *chan) >>> +{ >>> + unsigned int i = 0; >>> + >>> + do { >>> + u32 chcr = rcar_dmac_chan_read(chan, RCAR_DMACHCR); >>> + >>> + if (!(chcr & RCAR_DMACHCR_DE)) >>> + return 0; >>> + cpu_relax(); >>> + dev_dbg(chan->chan.device->dev, "DMA xfer couldn't be stopped"); >>> + } while (++i < NR_READS_TO_WAIT); >> >> Hm, this can be a *for* loop, no? > Could you explain why would you prefer a for loop here? do..while > makes sure even if NR_READS_TO_WAIT is set to 0, the stop action takes > place Hm, this doesn't make sense to me. If # of reads is 0, we shouldn't read, no? >> Please don't change the existing indentation, it doesn't seem like you're changing anything else here > ok. How should I send the updates patch though, through replying to > this email or a new thread? New thread I think. > Thanks! > Hamza MBR, Sergei