Re: [PATCHv9] dmaengine: Add support for BCM2835

[Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>]

On Sunday 05 January 2014, Florian Meier wrote:
> On 05.01.2014 15:06, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >>
> >> Sigh, the API is developing faster than I can keep track with updating
> >> this patch. I hope some day I will be faster....
> >> When Russell told me about the second one before, it hoped that I can
> >> avoid merging different trees on my own, but it seems that you want me
> >> to do that ;-)
> >
> > The dma_get_any_slave_channel() change is probably my fault. I suggested
> > both the initial dma_get_slave_channel() API and this one because the
> > original approach turned out too complicated. If dma_set_mask_and_coherent().
> >
> > I don't think you have to merge other trees, to get both APIs, they should
> > already be part of the dma-slave tree that your patch would get merged
> > into. If not, we can probably come up with a different solution. The
> > dma_set_mask_and_coherent() suggestion is not as important as the
> > dma_get_any_slave_channel() one, if you have to choose between them.
> 
> Both changes are in the slave-dma tree, but I need patches from the
> bcm2835 tree and the asoc tree, too. Although, it shouldn't be too
> complicated to merge them, I hope.

Why do you need the bcm2835 and asoc changes? The addition of the
dmaengine driver should be self-contained as far as I can tell,
except that the audio driver won't work unless both are merged.

This wouldn't be considered a strict dependency since you are not
breaking anything that used to work prior to the patches, and you
don't create a kernel version that doesn't build. Note that this
would be different if you had a dependency on a platform_data
definition.

	Arnd