[U-Boot] [PATCH v5 1/5] dma: lpc32xx: add DMA driver

[LEMIEUX, SYLVAIN]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vladimir Zapolskiy [mailto:vz at mleia.com]
> Sent: 6-Aug-15 2:43 PM
>
> Hi Sylvain,
>
> On 06.08.2015 16:50, LEMIEUX, SYLVAIN wrote:
> > Hi Vladimir,
> >
> > Thanks for the feedback;
> >
> > Marek, Vladimir,
> >
> > there is a question below; I will wait for feedback before sending an updated version of the patch.
> >
> >
> > Sylvain
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Vladimir Zapolskiy [mailto:vz at mleia.com]
> >>
> >> Hi Sylvain,
> >>
> >> On 05.08.2015 21:31, slemieux.tyco at gmail.com wrote:
> >>> From: Sylvain Lemieux <slemieux at tycoint.com>
> >>>
> >>> Incorporate DMA driver from legacy LPCLinux NXP BSP.
> >>> The files taken from the legacy patch are:
> >>> - lpc32xx DMA driver
> >>> - lpc3250 header file DMA registers definition.
> >>>
> >>> The legacy driver was updated and clean-up as part of the integration with the latest u-boot.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Sylvain Lemieux <slemieux at tycoint.com>
> >>> ---
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-lpc32xx/dma.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-lpc32xx/dma.h
> >>> new file mode 100644
> >>> index 0000000..15d829c
> >>> --- /dev/null
> >>> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-lpc32xx/dma.h
> >>> @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
> >>> +/*
> >>> + * LPC32xx DMA Controller Interface
> >>> + *
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >>> +
> >>> +int lpc32xx_dma_get_channel(void);
> >>> +int lpc32xx_dma_start_xfer(int channel, const struct lpc32xx_dmac_ll *desc,
> >>> +                      u32 config);
> >>> +int lpc32xx_dma_wait_status(int channel);
> >>> +void lpc32xx_dma_put_channel(int channel);
> >>
> >> There is no users of lpc32xx_dma_put_channel() interface, do you have
> >> them in mind?
> >>
> > The legacy NXP BSP driver was providing the support the get and release a channel;
> > I kept it there, knowing is currently not used.
> >
> > Do we want to keep this feature or remove it and only allowed channel allocation only?
> >
> > [...]
>
> I have no definite answer, in my opinion dead code should be removed, if
> its use is not planned. I would recommend to get the answer from a
> maintainer, who accepts this code (Tom Rini ?).
>
Agree with you regarding dead code;

This code will only be useful if we were managing DMA channel allocation and release.
I will remove it, as there is currently no need to support this functionality.
If it is require one day, it can be added later.

[...]
>
> --
> With best wishes,
> Vladimir

________________________________

This e-mail contains privileged and confidential information intended for the use of the addressees named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that you must not disseminate, copy or take any action in respect of any information contained in it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and immediately destroy this e-mail and its attachments.