From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Robert Jarzmik Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: smc911x: convert pxa dma to dmaengine Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2016 22:44:56 +0100 Message-ID: <87k2mi4ysn.fsf@belgarion.home> References: <1448919628-13273-1-git-send-email-robert.jarzmik@free.fr> <20151202.235217.2201517065767030121.davem@davemloft.net> <87fuzjl69l.fsf@belgarion.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Alberto Panizzo , Guennadi Liakhovetski , Hitoshi Mitake , Fabio Estevam , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: David Miller Return-path: In-Reply-To: <87fuzjl69l.fsf@belgarion.home> (Robert Jarzmik's message of "Thu, 03 Dec 2015 19:46:30 +0100") Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Robert Jarzmik writes: > David Miller writes: > >> From: Robert Jarzmik >> Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 22:40:28 +0100 >> >>> Convert the dma transfers to be dmaengine based, now pxa has a dmaengine >>> slave driver. This makes this driver a bit more PXA agnostic. >>> >>> The driver was only compile tested. The risk is quite small as no >>> current PXA platform I'm aware of is using smc911x driver. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Robert Jarzmik >> >> I've marked this 'deferred' in patchwork until someone tests >> these changes and says they should be good on all platforms >> this chip is used. > > Okay, so would any maintainer of non pxa boards give a feedback for this patch ? > The ones I have found are : > - sh2007: Guennadi and Hitoshi > - armadillo5x0: Alberto > - imx v6 and imx v7: Fabio > I've added the patch at the end of this mail for easier handling. > > Now, if no maintainer gives it a test, what do we do, David ? I'm intending to > remove "arch/arm/mach-pxa/include/mach/dma.h" in the near future, which will > break this driver somehow (at least for PXA boards, even if none is identified > so far). > So could we agree on a deadline, and what you wish to do : either drop the patch > or apply, or something else. Hi David, Apart from Alberto who answered he cannot test it by lack of hardware, the others didn't answer. So how can I move forward ? Would you want me to amend the KConfig to add a "&& !ARCH_PXA" on the "depend" line ? Cheers. -- Robert