On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 05:59:59PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Jon Mason <jon.ma...@intel.com> wrote: > > Set the DMA_PRIVATE dma_transaction_type in the capability mask. This > > enables the ability to get an exclusive ioatdma DMA channel for any > > devices that requests one via the dma_request_channel function call. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jon Mason <jon.ma...@intel.com> > > Acked-by: Dave Jiang <dave.ji...@intel.com> > > --- > > drivers/dma/ioat/dma_v3.c | 1 + > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/dma/ioat/dma_v3.c b/drivers/dma/ioat/dma_v3.c > > index ca6ea9b..ac2aeef 100644 > > --- a/drivers/dma/ioat/dma_v3.c > > +++ b/drivers/dma/ioat/dma_v3.c > > @@ -1883,6 +1883,7 @@ int ioat3_dma_probe(struct ioatdma_device *device, > > int dca) > > dma->copy_align = 6; > > > > dma_cap_set(DMA_INTERRUPT, dma->cap_mask); > > + dma_cap_set(DMA_PRIVATE, dma->cap_mask); > > dma->device_prep_dma_interrupt = ioat3_prep_interrupt_lock; > > DMA_PRIVATE here keeps all channels private, so they couldn't be used > elsewhere, for example raid offload. Do you need a private allocation > or can you get away with a dynamically assigned channel?
I would like to have a dedicated DMA engine. async_tx could cause the copies to complete out of order. Do I need to add infrastructure to allow for private channel usage, and when unused allow the channel to be used by async_tx? Thanks, Jon -- 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/
