On 18 May 2017 at 22:14, Wolfram Sang <w...@the-dreams.de> wrote:
> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 11:25:24AM +0200, Simon Horman wrote:
>> Hi Wolfram, Hi Ulf, Hi Arnd, Hi all,
>> the intention of this patch-set is to refactor the DMA support in
>> the Renesas SDHI driver in order to make it easier to add support
>> for using the SDHI hardware with different DMA implementations.
>> This is based on earlier work, posted as "[PATCH/RFC v3 0/6] mmc:
>> renesas_sdhi: add R-Car Gen-3 DMA support". It attempts to implement
>> the reworking of the driver proposed by Arnd[1] in his review of that
>> patch-set.
>> [1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mmc/msg38004.html
>> Unlike that patch-set this patch-set does not add support for
>> R-Car Gen-3 DMA. Rather it focuses on refactoring the code.
>> Changes between RFC and v2:
>> * Drop filenames from comment at top of source
>> * Consistently check for if (host->dma_ops) before using dma_ops.
>> Simon Horman (6):
>>   mmc: tmio: drop filenames from comment at top of source
>>   mmc: renesas-sdhi, tmio: make dma more modular
>>   mmc: tmio: rename tmio_mmc_{pio => core}.c
>>   mmc: renesas-sdhi: rename tmio_mmc_dma.c => renesas_sdhi_sys_dmac.c
>>   mmc: renesas-sdhi: rename sh_mobile_sdhi.c => renesas_sdhi_core.c
>>   mmc: renesas-sdhi: make renesas_sdhi_sys_dmac main module file
> Thanks Simon for this series! The file layout looks in deed much better
> now. And some light testing on my Lager didn't show any regressions. I
> have only minor comments which do not have anything to do with the code,
> so already here:
> Reviewed-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+rene...@sang-engineering.com>
> The comments:
> * MAINTAINERS file needs updating because of the new filenames
> * I'd prefer the _GPL variant of EXPORT_SYMBOL unless we have a reason
>   to not use it?
> * maybe this is also a good time to update the Renesas copyrights in
>   file headers?
> * checkpatch reports some whitespace errors on patch 6. I assume they
>   were already there in the code you moved around. Still, it might be
>   a nice occasion to fix those?
> Thanks again, nice work!
>    Wolfram

I have applied this for next, assuming Simon addresses Wolfram's
comments on top.

Thanks and kind regards

Reply via email to