G, Manjunath Kondaiah had written, on 10/01/2010 04:29 AM, the following:
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Peter Ujfalusi
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 2:22 PM
To: Menon, Nishanth
Cc: Tony Lindgren; [email protected]; Jarkko Nikula;
Liam Girdwood
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] OMAP3: DMA: Errata: sDMA FIFO
draining does not finish
...
+ if (cpu_is_omap34xx() && (l & OMAP_DMA_CCR_SEL_SRC_DST_SYNC)) {
does it make sense to use an dma_errata variable and populate it?
Hmmm, the errata handling via dma_errata shall be done
separately IMHO, since if we do that, than we need to revisit
other parts of the code as well, and replace the existing
errata handling.
But yes, it would make the code much more readable, and we
can easily track, which errata has been already addressed.
This is already done as a part of dma hwmod which is under review.
-Manjunath
Apologies, but does that mean:
a) the errata i541 is handled as well as part of hwmod series?
b) the patch needs to be ported ontop of hwmod series?
--
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
