On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 06:39:36PM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > On 18:32 Thu 30 May , Nicolas Ferre wrote: > > On 30/05/2013 18:08, ludovic.desroc...@atmel.com : > > >From: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroc...@atmel.com> > > > > > >For most devices the FIFO configuration is the same i.e. when half FIFO > > >size is > > >available/filled, a source/destination request is serviced. But USART > > >devices > > >have to do it when there is enough space/data available to perform a single > > >AHB access so the ASAP configuration. > > > > > >Acked-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagn...@jcrosoft.com> > > >Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroc...@atmel.com> > > > > Clear and neat: thanks Ludo. > > agreed > > can we apply this via AT91 as this depends on some cleanup I did on DT and > could result on some nigthmware conflict >
In fact, I am not sure it's the best solution. I have noticed that there is a conflict with a patch sent by Nicolas (dmaengine: at_hdmac: extend hardware handshaking interface identification) which is already in Vinod's tree but which is not present on Jean-Christophe's cleanup tree on which I based these patches. Moreover this patch doesn't use macros introduced by Nicolas' patch. I may update it and it should go through Vinod's tree with a dependence on patch 1/3. What's your point of view? _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss