On Jan 30, 2008 5:26 AM, Haavard Skinnemoen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [..] > Right. I'll add a "unsigned int engine_type" field so that engine > drivers can go ahead and extend the standard dma_device structure. > Maybe we should add a "void *platform_data" field to the dma_slave > struct as well so that platforms can pass arbitrary platform-specific > information to the DMA controller driver? >
I think we can get away with not adding an engine_type field: 1/ For a given platform there will usually only be one driver active. For example I have an architecture (IOP) specific dma_copy_to_user implementation that can safely assume it is talking to the iop-adma driver since ioat_dma and others are precluded by the Kconfig. 2/ If there was a situation where two dma drivers were active in a system you could tell them apart by comparing the function pointers, i.e. dma_device1->device_prep_dma_memcpy != dma_device2->device_prep_dma_memcpy. -- Dan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
