From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752620AbcA2EjB (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 28 Jan 2016 23:39:01 -0500
Received: from mail-ob0-f172.google.com ([209.85.214.172]:34882 "EHLO
	mail-ob0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751926AbcA2Ei5 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 28 Jan 2016 23:38:57 -0500
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 22:38:55 -0600
From: Andy Gross <andy.gross@linaro.org>
To: Stanimir Varbanov <stanimir.varbanov@linaro.org>
Cc: Andy Gross <agross@codeaurora.org>, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, dmaengine@vger.kernel.org,
        Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>,
        Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk>,
        Archit Taneja <architt@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] dmaengine: qcom_bam_dma: use correct pipe FIFO size
Message-ID: <20160129043855.GA4608@hector.attlocal.net>
References: <1448961299-15161-1-git-send-email-stanimir.varbanov@linaro.org>
 <1448961299-15161-4-git-send-email-stanimir.varbanov@linaro.org>
 <20151201172307.GA26687@Agamemnon.attlocal.net>
 <565F1FDB.4020106@linaro.org>
 <20151202172255.GA9599@Agamemnon.attlocal.net>
 <56697BA9.5050805@linaro.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <56697BA9.5050805@linaro.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 03:18:33PM +0200, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:

<snip>

> >>> This is just using the #define.  That is ok, but if you use this instead of the
> >>> BAM_P_FIFO_SIZES then you need to fix your comment.  Or actually use the
> >>> register value.... otherwise looks fine.
> >>
> >> I did not follow your comment, but the intension of the patch is to set
> >> the proper FIFO size in BAM_P_FIFO_SIZES register, i.e. 32K - 8.
> > 
> > Sorry, I mixed up the usage and was thinking there was something you read out
> > that told you the size.  That's not how it works, unfortunately.  The
> > MAX_DATA_SIZE is fine, but the name is a little misleading.  Perhaps just
> > BAM_FIFO_SIZE?
> 
> OK I can rename BAM_MAX_DATA_SIZE to BAM_FIFO_SIZE, and use it when
> setting BAM_P_FIFO_SIZES register. Is that fine to you?

Yes that's fine with me.