lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Oct]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v5 4/7] dmaengine: xilinx_dma: program hardware supported buffer length
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 4:56 PM Vinod <vkoul@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On 28-09-18, 08:53, Andrea Merello wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 6:25 PM Vinod <vkoul@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> > > > @@ -964,7 +968,7 @@ static int xilinx_dma_calc_copysize(struct xilinx_dma_chan *chan,
> > > > int size, int done)
> > > > {
> > > > size_t copy = min_t(size_t, size - done,
> > > > - XILINX_DMA_MAX_TRANS_LEN);
> > > > + chan->xdev->max_buffer_len);
> > >
> > > hmm why not add max_buffer_len in patch 1 again, and then use default
> > > len as XILINX_DMA_MAX_TRANS_LEN and add multiple lengths here :)
> >
> > Sorry, I'm not getting your point. Could you please elaborate the "add
> > multiple lengths here" thing ?
>
> IIRC (sorry been travelling and vacation), add
> chan->xdev->max_buffer_len in patch 1 and initialize it to
> XILINX_DMA_MAX_TRANS_LEN. Then in subsequent patches update the length.

Ah ok. IMO introducing max_buffer_len seems more related to what 4/7
does (actually getting the max transfer len from DT, thus it is not
constant anymore) rather than to what 1/7 does (commonizing the
calculation of transfer len as it is).. This is why I've introduced it
in 4/7..

.. But if you prefer this way, I'll change this :) .. Maybe we can
change 1/7 commit message so that this change looks less off-topic..
But I have not found a very good title yet.. Something like "Prepare
for DMA copy size calculation rework" ?

> --
> ~Vinod

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-10-08 08:48    [W:0.072 / U:5.424 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site