On Wednesday 17 April 2013, Lee Jones wrote:
> > This looks unnecessarily complex.
> 
> That thought did cross my mind.
> 
> > Why not just do dma_request_slave_channel_compat() unconditionally here?
> 
> So how about something like this instead, as it keeps the current
> semantics, and only differs in the case of DT.

Yes, looks better.

> @@ -298,14 +298,16 @@ static void mmci_init_sg(struct mmci_host *host, struct 
> mmc_data *data)
>   * no custom DMA interfaces are supported.
>   */
>  #ifdef CONFIG_DMA_ENGINE
> -static void mmci_dma_setup(struct mmci_host *host)
> +static void mmci_dma_setup(struct amba_device *dev,
> +                        struct mmci_host *host)
>  {
> +     struct device_node *np = dev->dev.of_node;
>       struct mmci_platform_data *plat = host->plat;
>       const char *rxname, *txname;
>       dma_cap_mask_t mask;
>  
> -     if (!plat || !plat->dma_filter) {
> -             dev_info(mmc_dev(host->mmc), "no DMA platform data\n");
> +     if (!(plat && plat->dma_filter) && !np) {
> +             dev_info(mmc_dev(host->mmc), "no DMA platform data or DT\n");
>               return;
>       }

I think you can further simplify this, given that in the DT case we always
allocate a zeroed mmci_platform_data for host->plat, so !plat cannot happen
when we get here.

> @@ -321,19 +323,21 @@ static void mmci_dma_setup(struct mmci_host *host)
>        * attempt to use it bidirectionally, however if it is
>        * is specified but cannot be located, DMA will be disabled.
>        */
> -     if (plat->dma_rx_param) {
> -             host->dma_rx_channel = dma_request_channel(mask,
> -                                                        plat->dma_filter,
> -                                                        plat->dma_rx_param);
> +     if ((plat && plat->dma_rx_param) || np) {
> +             host->dma_rx_channel = dma_request_slave_channel_compat(mask,
> +                                     (plat) ? plat->dma_filter : NULL,
> +                                     (plat) ? plat->dma_rx_param : NULL,
> +                                     &dev->dev, "rx");
>               /* E.g if no DMA hardware is present */
>               if (!host->dma_rx_channel)
>                       dev_err(mmc_dev(host->mmc), "no RX DMA channel\n");

And based on that, you can unconditionally pass plat->dma_filter and
plat->dma_rx_param here. In case of DT, they will be NULL, and they
will not be used either.

        Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to