Hi Vinod,
Thanks for the review...
>
>On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 03:41:35PM +0530, Kedareswara rao Appana wrote:
>
>Patch title should say what is does, not the cause/effect
Sure will fix in v2...
>
>An apt title might be "populate dma caps properly"
>
>> When client driver uses
Hi Vinod,
Thanks for the review...
>
>On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 03:41:35PM +0530, Kedareswara rao Appana wrote:
>
>Patch title should say what is does, not the cause/effect
Sure will fix in v2...
>
>An apt title might be "populate dma caps properly"
>
>> When client driver uses
On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 03:41:35PM +0530, Kedareswara rao Appana wrote:
Patch title should say what is does, not the cause/effect
An apt title might be "populate dma caps properly"
> When client driver uses dma_get_slave_caps() api,
> it checks for certain fields of dma_device struct
>
On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 03:41:35PM +0530, Kedareswara rao Appana wrote:
Patch title should say what is does, not the cause/effect
An apt title might be "populate dma caps properly"
> When client driver uses dma_get_slave_caps() api,
> it checks for certain fields of dma_device struct
>
When client driver uses dma_get_slave_caps() api,
it checks for certain fields of dma_device struct
currently driver is not settings few fields resulting
dma_get_slave_caps() returning failure.
This patch fixes this issue by populating proper values
to the struct dma_device fields.
When client driver uses dma_get_slave_caps() api,
it checks for certain fields of dma_device struct
currently driver is not settings few fields resulting
dma_get_slave_caps() returning failure.
This patch fixes this issue by populating proper values
to the struct dma_device fields.
6 matches
Mail list logo