On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 11:14:03AM +0100, Ludovic Desroches wrote: > On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 10:47:15AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Wednesday 19 November 2014 10:16:47 Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 02:47:59PM +0100, Ludovic Desroches wrote: > > > > Return probe defer if requesting a dma channel without a dma controller > > > > probed. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <[email protected]> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++------ > > > > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c > > > > b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c > > > > index 77fb647..df3f4c4 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c > > > > @@ -679,14 +679,21 @@ static int at91_twi_configure_dma(struct > > > > at91_twi_dev *dev, u32 phy_addr) > > > > dma_cap_zero(mask); > > > > dma_cap_set(DMA_SLAVE, mask); > > > > > > > > - dma->chan_tx = dma_request_slave_channel_compat(mask, filter, > > > > pdata, > > > > - dev->dev, "tx"); > > > > - if (!dma->chan_tx) { > > > > + dma->chan_tx = dma_request_slave_channel_reason(dev->dev, "tx"); > > > > > > Will it cause regressions if you drop the compat-version of requesting > > > a channel? > > > > I got curious about this, since the patch looks obviously wrong, but > > actually it's ok. However the entire DMA support for non-DT platforms > > can be dropped in this driver, see patch below > > > > > > + if (IS_ERR(dma->chan_tx)) { > > > > + ret = PTR_ERR(dma->chan_tx); > > > > + if (ret == -EPROBE_DEFER) { > > > > + dev_warn(dev->dev, "no DMA channel available at > > > > the moment\n"); > > > > > > I'd say drop this warning. The core usually prints when deferred probing > > > takes place. > > > > Definitely yes. > > > > Arnd > > 8<--- > > [PATCH] i2c: at91: remove legacy DMA supoprt > > > > Since at91sam9g45 is now DT-only, all DMA capable users of this driver are > > using the DT case, and the legacy support can be removed. While at it, fix > > the deferred probe case. > > > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]>
Thanks for this cleanup, yet I'd really appreciate a build test at least. > Acked-by: Ludovic Desroches <[email protected]> From you, I had even hoped for a quick runtime test. Would that be possible for future patches? Thanks, Wolfram
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
