On Fri, 2011-07-08 at 11:04 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 01:52:17PM +0530, Raju, Sundaram wrote: > > I am planning to move TI SDMA driver in OMAP tree > > into the dmaengine framework. > > > > The first immediate issue of concern I noticed is the > > huge number of client drivers that use the existing SDMA driver. > > More than 15 client drivers are using the current SDMA driver. > > > > Moving the SDMA driver along with all of these client drivers at a > > single stretch seems a humungous task. > > I noticed a model in the existing DMA drivers in dmaengine > > framework that will over come this issue. > > It _is_ sane to build a dmaengine driver on top of the existing SoC > private API, then convert the drivers to DMA engine, and then cleanup > the resulting DMA engine driver. > > What we must make sure though is that the DMA engine slave API (which > isn't well documented) is correctly implemented before drivers are > converted over to use the DMA engine support code, otherwise we may > end up with lots of drivers that require re-fixing several times over. Russel,
Remember we have addressed the documentation part, is there something else you feel is still missing? -- ~Vinod Koul Intel Corp. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
