Re: [PATCH] dmaengine: axi-dmac: simple device_config operation implemented

[Ardelean, Alexandru]

On Wed, 2019-10-16 at 10:38 +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> [External]
> 
> On 15-10-19, 23:06, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> 
> > > > This DMA controller is a bit special.
> > > > It gets synthesized in FPGA, so the configuration is fixed and
> > > > cannot be
> > > > changed at runtime. Maybe later we would allow/implement this
> > > > functionality, but this is a question for my HDL colleagues.
> > > > 
> > > > Two things are done (in this order):
> > > > 1. For some paramters, axi_dmac_parse_chan_dt() is used to
> > > > determine things
> > > > from device-tree; as it's an FPGA core, things are synthesized once
> > > > and
> > > > cannot change (yet)
> > > > 2. For other parameters, the axi_dmac_detect_caps() is used to
> > > > guess some
> > > > of them at probe time, by doing some reg reads/writes
> > > 
> > > So the question for you hw folks is how would a controller work with
> > > multiple slave devices, do they need to synthesize it everytime?
> > > 
> > > Rather than that why cant they make the peripheral addresses
> > > programmable so that you dont need updating fpga everytime!
> > 
> > The DMA has a direct connection to the peripheral and the peripheral
> > data port is not connected to the general purpose memory interconnect.
> > So you can't write to it by an MMIO address and	 there is no
> > address
> > that needs to be configured. For an FPGA based design this is quite a
> > good solution in terms of resource usage, performance and simplicity. A
> > direct connection requires less resources than connection it to the
> > central memory interconnect, while at the same time having lower
> > latency
> > and not eating up any additional bandwidth on the central memory
> > connect.
> 
> thanks for explanation!

also many thanks [from my side] for the explanations :)

> 
> > So slave config in this case is a noop and all it can do is verify that
> > the requested configuration matches the available configuration.
> 
> okay so noop it is!
>