On Thursday, September 1, 2016 5:14:28 PM CEST Leo Li wrote:
>
> Hi Felipe and Arnd,
>
> It has been a while since the last response to this discussion, but we
> haven't reached an agreement yet! Can we get to a conclusion on if it
> is valid to create child platform device for abstraction purpose? If
> yes, can this child device do DMA by itself?
I'd say it's no problem for a driver to create child devices in order
to represent different aspects of a device, but you should not rely on
those devices working when used with the dma-mapping interfaces.
This used to be simpler back when we could configure the kernel for
only one SoC platform at a time, and the platforms could provide their
own overrides for the dma-mapping interfaces. These days, we rely on
firmware or bootloader to describe various aspects of how DMA is done,
so you can't assume that passing a device without an of_node pointer
or ACPI data into those functions will do the right thing.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
