On Mon, 2011-10-17 at 21:22 +0530, Jassi Brar wrote: > On 15 October 2011 23:05, Vinod Koul <vinod.k...@intel.com> wrote: > > > Another alternate approach could be to add one more argument to > > prep_slave_sg API which allows us to pass additional runtime specific > > parameters. This can be NULL and unused for existing drivers and used in > > RIO and any future subsystems which want to use dmaengine. > > Thoughts...? > > > That doesn't sound much different than passing the data via > dma_chan.private during prep_slave_sg. Only now we add to > the number of arguments. Yes agreed, but we already decided and marked it as depreciated.
> And then either this argument would be RapidIO specific (unfair > to other users) or generic. In latter case what would it look like ? My initial thoughts were to add an argument which only the specific dmac knows howto decode and is filled by its client. As i said for existing users and people who don't require dynamic information wouldn't bother. The pros - allows us to support RIO kind of subsystems where one needs to pass subsystem specific information for programing the dmac - doesn't require us to add subsystem specific stuff in dmaengine, today its RIO tomorrow some other folks may want to add. We want to maintain dmaengine as a generic framework, while also trying to support multiple audiences. Cons: - there is no guarantee; dmac expects foo and clients pass bar I am okay if we have alternate way to support this with above goal :) -- ~Vinod _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
