On 11-07-18, 05:34, Robin Gong wrote:
> > On 11-07-18, 00:23, Robin Gong wrote:
> > > Add MEMCPY support, meanwhile, add SDMA_BD_MAX_CNT instead of
> > > '0xffff'.
> >
> > latter part should be its own patch. Never mix things
> Okay, I will split it even for this minor change.
Yes, a patch should represent _one_ thing, describe that one thing and
do that one thing.
Anything else, doesn't matter how simple or complex should be an
individual patch
> > > + if (!desc)
> > > + goto err_out;
> > > +
> > > + do {
> > > + count = min_t(size_t, len, SDMA_BD_MAX_CNT);
> > > + bd = &desc->bd[i];
> > > + bd->buffer_addr = dma_src;
> > > + bd->ext_buffer_addr = dma_dst;
> > > + bd->mode.count = count;
> > > + desc->chn_count += count;
> > > +
> > > + switch (sdmac->word_size) {
> > > + case DMA_SLAVE_BUSWIDTH_4_BYTES:
> >
> > This looks wrong, we are in memcpy, there is no SLAVE so no SLAVE widths..
> >
> Okay, will remove check bus width.
it is not about bus_width but the fact that you are using slave
concepts. In memcpy we have _no_ slave, hence do not use anything
related to slave including dma_slave_config
--
~Vinod
