Re: [PATCH] DMA: Correct invalid assumptions in the Kconfig text

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@...>
Cc: Shannon Nelson <shannon.nelson@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, David Brownell <david-b@...>, <kernel@...>, <linux-arm-kernel@...>
Date: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 - 11:55 am

Hi Haavard,

On 10/24/07, Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@atmel.com> wrote:

Patches welcome :-)


Part of the problem of supporting slave/device DMA along side generic
memcpy/xor/memset acceleration is that it adds a number of caveats and
restrictions to the interface.  One idea is to create another client
layer, similar to async_tx, that can handle the architecture specific
address, bus, and device pairing restrictions.  In other words make
device-dma a superset of the generic offload capabilities and move it
to its own channel management layer.


Should this patch wait until the framework has been extended?

Otherwise, Acked-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>


Regards,
Dan
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH] DMA: Correct invalid assumptions in the Kconfig text, Haavard Skinnemoen, (Wed Oct 24, 5:38 am)
Re: [PATCH] DMA: Correct invalid assumptions in the Kconfig ..., Dan Williams, (Wed Oct 24, 11:55 am)
Re: [PATCH] DMA: Correct invalid assumptions in the Kconfig ..., Haavard Skinnemoen, (Wed Oct 24, 2:16 pm)
Re: [PATCH] DMA: Correct invalid assumptions in the Kconfig ..., Haavard Skinnemoen, (Sat Oct 27, 12:07 pm)
Re: [PATCH] DMA: Correct invalid assumptions in the Kconfig ..., Haavard Skinnemoen, (Thu Oct 25, 5:32 am)
Re: [PATCH] DMA: Correct invalid assumptions in the Kconfig ..., Haavard Skinnemoen, (Sat Oct 27, 9:58 am)