On Tue, 30 Apr 2013, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
>
> > Currently, if DMA information isn't passed from platform data, then DMA
> > will not be used. This patch allows DMA information obtained though Device
> > Tree to be used as well.
> >
> > Cc:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
> Currently, if DMA information isn't passed from platform data, then DMA
> will not be used. This patch allows DMA information obtained though Device
> Tree to be used as well.
>
> Cc: Russell King
> Cc: Chris Ball
> Cc:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Lee Jones lee.jo...@linaro.org wrote:
Currently, if DMA information isn't passed from platform data, then DMA
will not be used. This patch allows DMA information obtained though Device
Tree to be used as well.
Cc: Russell King li...@arm.linux.org.uk
Cc:
On Tue, 30 Apr 2013, Linus Walleij wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Lee Jones lee.jo...@linaro.org wrote:
Currently, if DMA information isn't passed from platform data, then DMA
will not be used. This patch allows DMA information obtained though Device
Tree to be used as well.
Currently, if DMA information isn't passed from platform data, then DMA
will not be used. This patch allows DMA information obtained though Device
Tree to be used as well.
Cc: Russell King
Cc: Chris Ball
Cc: linux-...@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones
---
drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c | 43
Currently, if DMA information isn't passed from platform data, then DMA
will not be used. This patch allows DMA information obtained though Device
Tree to be used as well.
Cc: Russell King li...@arm.linux.org.uk
Cc: Chris Ball c...@laptop.org
Cc: linux-...@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 11:25:44AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> +static void mmci_dma_setup(struct device *dev, struct mmci_host *host)
> +{
> + const char *rxname, *txname;
> +
> + host->dma_rx_channel = dma_request_slave_channel(dev, "rx");
> + host->dma_tx_channel =
On Thursday 18 April 2013, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 09:02:38AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > @@ -321,19 +323,21 @@ static void mmci_dma_setup(struct mmci_host *host)
> >* attempt to use it bidirectionally, however if it is
> >* is specified but cannot
On 18 April 2013 10:02, Lee Jones wrote:
>> I think you can further simplify this, given that in the DT case we always
>> allocate a zeroed mmci_platform_data for host->plat, so !plat cannot happen
>> when we get here.
>
> Okay, third time lucky. :)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 09:02:38AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> @@ -321,19 +323,21 @@ static void mmci_dma_setup(struct mmci_host *host)
>* attempt to use it bidirectionally, however if it is
>* is specified but cannot be located, DMA will be disabled.
>*/
> - if
> I think you can further simplify this, given that in the DT case we always
> allocate a zeroed mmci_platform_data for host->plat, so !plat cannot happen
> when we get here.
Okay, third time lucky. :)
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c
index 372e921..3260ab4 100644
I think you can further simplify this, given that in the DT case we always
allocate a zeroed mmci_platform_data for host-plat, so !plat cannot happen
when we get here.
Okay, third time lucky. :)
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c
index 372e921..3260ab4 100644
---
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 09:02:38AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
@@ -321,19 +323,21 @@ static void mmci_dma_setup(struct mmci_host *host)
* attempt to use it bidirectionally, however if it is
* is specified but cannot be located, DMA will be disabled.
*/
- if
On 18 April 2013 10:02, Lee Jones lee.jo...@linaro.org wrote:
I think you can further simplify this, given that in the DT case we always
allocate a zeroed mmci_platform_data for host-plat, so !plat cannot happen
when we get here.
Okay, third time lucky. :)
diff --git
On Thursday 18 April 2013, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 09:02:38AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
@@ -321,19 +323,21 @@ static void mmci_dma_setup(struct mmci_host *host)
* attempt to use it bidirectionally, however if it is
* is specified but cannot be
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 11:25:44AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
+static void mmci_dma_setup(struct device *dev, struct mmci_host *host)
+{
+ const char *rxname, *txname;
+
+ host-dma_rx_channel = dma_request_slave_channel(dev, rx);
+ host-dma_tx_channel =
On Wednesday 17 April 2013, Lee Jones wrote:
> > This looks unnecessarily complex.
>
> That thought did cross my mind.
>
> > Why not just do dma_request_slave_channel_compat() unconditionally here?
>
> So how about something like this instead, as it keeps the current
> semantics, and only
> This looks unnecessarily complex.
That thought did cross my mind.
> Why not just do dma_request_slave_channel_compat() unconditionally here?
So how about something like this instead, as it keeps the current
semantics, and only differs in the case of DT.
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c
On Wednesday 17 April 2013, Lee Jones wrote:
> #ifdef CONFIG_DMA_ENGINE
> -static void mmci_dma_setup(struct mmci_host *host)
> +static void mmci_dma_setup(struct amba_device *dev,
> +struct mmci_host *host)
> {
> + struct device_node *np = dev->dev.of_node;
>
Currently, if DMA information isn't passed from platform data, then DMA
will not be used. This patch allows DMA information obtained though Device
Tree to be used as well.
Cc: Russell King
Cc: Chris Ball
Cc: linux-...@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones
---
drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c | 43
Currently, if DMA information isn't passed from platform data, then DMA
will not be used. This patch allows DMA information obtained though Device
Tree to be used as well.
Cc: Russell King li...@arm.linux.org.uk
Cc: Chris Ball c...@laptop.org
Cc: linux-...@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones
On Wednesday 17 April 2013, Lee Jones wrote:
#ifdef CONFIG_DMA_ENGINE
-static void mmci_dma_setup(struct mmci_host *host)
+static void mmci_dma_setup(struct amba_device *dev,
+struct mmci_host *host)
{
+ struct device_node *np = dev-dev.of_node;
struct
This looks unnecessarily complex.
That thought did cross my mind.
Why not just do dma_request_slave_channel_compat() unconditionally here?
So how about something like this instead, as it keeps the current
semantics, and only differs in the case of DT.
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c
On Wednesday 17 April 2013, Lee Jones wrote:
This looks unnecessarily complex.
That thought did cross my mind.
Why not just do dma_request_slave_channel_compat() unconditionally here?
So how about something like this instead, as it keeps the current
semantics, and only differs in the
24 matches
Mail list logo
