Re: [PATCHv4] DMAEngine: Define interleaved transfer request api

[Jassi Brar]

On 10 October 2011 12:23, Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> +struct dmaxfer_memcpy_template {
> +       dma_addr_t src_start;
> +       dma_addr_t dst_start;
> +       bool src_inc;
> +       bool dst_inc;
> +       bool src_sgl;
> +       bool dst_sgl;
> +       size_t numf;
> +       size_t frame_size;
> +       struct data_chunk sgl[0];
> +};
> +
> +struct dmaxfer_slave_template {
> +       dma_addr_t mem;
> +       bool mem_inc;
> +       size_t numf;
> +       size_t frame_size;
> +       struct data_chunk sgl[0];
> +};
>
(1) Please tell how is dmaxfer_slave_template supposed to work on
 bi-directional channels?
 Keeping in mind, dma_slave_config.direction is marked to go away
 in future.

(2)
  * slave_template.mem  <=>  memcpy_template.src_start
  * slave_template.mem_inc  <=>  memcpy_template.src_inc

 So essentially
  memcpy_template  :=  slave_template + src/dst_sgl + dst_start + dst_inc

 Even after this separation, there is nothing slave specific in
dmaxfer_slave_template. The slave client still needs DMA_SLAVE_CONFIG
to specify slave parameters of the transfer.
 You only save a few bytes in a _copy_ of memcpy_template.

Sorry but I only see code duplication and a very vulnerable segregation.

>
> The point is that it makes it simpler to understand what we are doing
> rather than resort to parsing to find out if its memcpy or slave and
> what is the direction.
>
Not sure how reading dmaxfer_template.xfer_direction is "parsing".
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/