On Monday 22 April 2013, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote: > > On 04/22/2013 02:38 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Monday 22 April 2013, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote: > >> > >> There is no sensible reason why #dma-cells shouldn't be allowed to be 0. > >> It is > >> completely up to the DMA controller how many additional parameters, > >> besides the > >> phandle, it needs to identify a channel. E.g. for DMA controller with only > >> one > >> channel or for DMA controllers which don't have a restriction on which > >> channel > >> can be used for which peripheral it completely legitimate to not require > >> any > >> additional parameters. > >> > >> Also fixes the following warning: > >> drivers/dma/of-dma.c: In function 'of_dma_controller_register': > >> drivers/dma/of-dma.c:67:7: warning: 'nbcells' may be used > >> uninitialized in this function > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Lars-Peter Clausen <l...@metafoo.de> > > > > Do you have an example for this? If a dma engine has only one request line, > > why would you even use the dmaengine subsystem for it, rather than including > > the code to program it in the slave driver? > > Why wouldn't I use the dmaengine subsystem for a DMA controller? In my > particular case different instances of the same DMA core will be used with > different DMA slaves. And the DMA slaves can also have different DMA master > cores, depending on the system.
Right, that makes sense. Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
