Re: [PATCH 2/8] soc: tegra: fuse: Change to the correct __dma_request_channel() prototype

[Baolin Wang]

On Wed, 8 May 2019 at 23:15, Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> 07.05.2019 9:09, Baolin Wang ÐÐÑÐÑ:
> > Since we've introduced one device node parameter for __dma_request_channel(),
> > thus change to the correct function prototype.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/soc/tegra/fuse/fuse-tegra20.c |    2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/soc/tegra/fuse/fuse-tegra20.c b/drivers/soc/tegra/fuse/fuse-tegra20.c
> > index 49ff017..e2571b6 100644
> > --- a/drivers/soc/tegra/fuse/fuse-tegra20.c
> > +++ b/drivers/soc/tegra/fuse/fuse-tegra20.c
> > @@ -110,7 +110,7 @@ static int tegra20_fuse_probe(struct tegra_fuse *fuse)
> >       dma_cap_zero(mask);
> >       dma_cap_set(DMA_SLAVE, mask);
> >
> > -     fuse->apbdma.chan = __dma_request_channel(&mask, dma_filter, NULL);
> > +     fuse->apbdma.chan = __dma_request_channel(&mask, dma_filter, NULL, NULL);
> >       if (!fuse->apbdma.chan)
> >               return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> >
> >
>
> 1) Kernel should be kept bisect'able by not having intermediate patches
> that break compilation. Hence you should squash the changes into a
> single patch.
>
> 2) Better to replace __dma_request_channel() with dma_request_channel()
> since they are equal.

Good point. I'll change to use dma_request_channel() in next version
if no other objections. Thanks.

-- 
Baolin Wang
Best Regards