On Friday 31 May 2013 17:30:01 Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

quoted

On Friday 31 May 2013 16:52:13 Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:

quoted

I think it's more a matter of using the API correctly. The dmaengine
API is an abstraction to separate the slave driver from the master
through well-defined calls. If you make additional assumptions
in the slave driver about the master, that is a layering violation.

I think it is a common practice, see e.g.

drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c
drivers/mmc/host/davinci_mmc.c

Yes, those should be fixed as well.

And what do you do for DT-based platforms?

Once the driver is DT-enabled, we no longer have to pass
a filter function at all because the slave id and all settings
will get pulled out of the DT using the dma engine's xlate()
callback.

	Arnd