Re: [PATCH] fsldma: use PCI Read Multiple command

Kumar Gala
2009-06-12T18:04:22Z

On Jun 12, 2009, at 12:38 PM, Dan Williams wrote:

> Kumar Gala wrote:
>> On Jun 12, 2009, at 4:23 AM, Li Yang wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 11:17 PM, Ira
>>> Snyder<iws@ovro.caltech.edu> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 09:45:26PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>>>>> On Apr 27, 2009, at 3:49 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Timur Tabi <timur@freescale.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Adding Kumar to the CC: list, since he might pick up the patch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Acked-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree with taking this through Kumar's tree.
>>>>> I'm going through patches for .31.. Should I still pick this
>>>>> up? Going
>>>>> forward should I pick up fsldma patches?
>>>>>
>>>> I'm fine with that, but you should probably talk to Li Yang
>>>> (added to
>>>> CC). He's gotten in contact with me a few times recently.
>>> I am fine with both ways for this patch as it is only related to
>>> Freescale register details. But in general I think patches should
>>> go
>>> through functional subsystem, as they usually would need insight of
>>> the subsystem architecture. I prefer the way that the patch acked
>>> or
>>> signed-off by Freescale guys and push upstream through Dan's tree as
>>> most other subsystems did. Unless Dan prefers to ack the subsystem
>>> architectural part of each patch and have them pushed other way.
>> I agree w/this and just wanting to see what Dan's preference is.
>
> I'll take fsldma patches through the dmaengine tree with Leo's ack/
> sign-off. That last request was a one-off because I had nothing
> else to push and the discussion was very architecture specific.

Sounds good to me. I expect you to pick up this patch for .31

- k