On Wednesday 12 December 2012, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> I saw the binding document and it looks it can be applied to dw_dmac
> too, as there is nothing special for it.
>
> The question is how? We are already late for merge window and this
> one is queued. Supplying a new patch, getting it reviewed/te
On 12 December 2012 14:10, Andy Shevchenko
wrote:
> Will we survive if the patch is in mainline? I mean how big the impact
> of it is?
It doesn't fail to do fulfill its purpose and even ALL DT stuff would work well.
Its just the matter of using the right API's, design and bindings :)
--
To unsubs
On Mon, 2012-12-10 at 22:08 +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> The build bug is not the problem however, but the abuse of the
> API is. Andy, are you sure you understood what this does when
> you gave you Reviewed-by comment?
Thank you for pointing this out to refresh my memories and go through
docume
On Wed, 2012-12-12 at 08:30 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > * It requires slave drivers to know that they are using the dw_dmac
> > driver and pass a pointer to dw_generic_filter, which is not
> > generic at all
> >
> > * It requires the dmac node to have information about all slaves
> >
> > Th
Sorry for replying late, was too busy with other work yesterday.
On 11 December 2012 03:38, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> I'm deeply sorry for the very late complaint on this, but I only now
Better late than never :)
> noticed this patch as I was seeing build breakage in linux-next
> because of it.
O
On Monday 10 December 2012, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> The build bug is not the problem however, but the abuse of the
> API is. Andy, are you sure you understood what this does when
> you gave you Reviewed-by comment?
>
Ah, I just saw that Andy had the right intuition when commenting on
it at first,
On Tuesday 16 October 2012, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> dw_dmac driver already supports device tree but it used to have its platform
> data passed the non-DT way.
>
> This patch does following changes:
> - pass platform data via DT, non-DT way still takes precedence if both are
> used.
> - create gener
On Fri, 2012-10-26 at 14:35 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> >> I can see that you applied these patches and they are present in
> >> linux-next. But i feel
> >> the order of patches is bad.
> > Yes looks like I forgot to sort the mbox series :(
> >
> > since all patches were applied nicely, and they s
On 26 October 2012 14:18, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-10-26 at 14:25 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> I can see that you applied these patches and they are present in
>> linux-next. But i feel
>> the order of patches is bad.
> Yes looks like I forgot to sort the mbox series :(
>
> since all patc
On Fri, 2012-10-26 at 14:25 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Hi Vinod,
>
> On 16 October 2012 09:49, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > dw_dmac driver already supports device tree but it used to have its platform
> > data passed the non-DT way.
> >
> > This patch does following changes:
> > - pass platform data
Hi Vinod,
On 16 October 2012 09:49, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> dw_dmac driver already supports device tree but it used to have its platform
> data passed the non-DT way.
>
> This patch does following changes:
> - pass platform data via DT, non-DT way still takes precedence if both are
> used.
> - cre
dw_dmac driver already supports device tree but it used to have its platform
data passed the non-DT way.
This patch does following changes:
- pass platform data via DT, non-DT way still takes precedence if both are used.
- create generic filter routine
- Earlier slave information was made availabl
12 matches
Mail list logo
