lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [May]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [RFC 2/6] dmaengine: xilinx_dma: Pass AXI4-Stream control words to netdev dma client
    From
    Date
    Hi,

    On 2018-05-17 09:39, Radhey Shyam Pandey wrote:
    >> Well, let's see where this is going to go when I can send the patches
    >> for review.
    > Thanks all. @Peter: If we have metadata patchset ready may be good
    > to send an RFC?

    Sorry for the delay, I got distracted by this:
    http://www.ti.com/lit/pdf/spruid7 Chapter 10.

    I have given some tough to the metadata attach patches.
    In my case the 'metadata' is more like private data section within the
    DMA descriptor (10.1.2.2.1) which is used by the remote peripheral and
    the driver for the given peripheral and it is optional.

    I liked the idea of treating it as metadata as it gives more generic API
    which can be adopted by other drivers if they need something similar.

    Another issue I have with the attach metadata way is that it would
    require one memcpy to copy the data to the DMA descriptor and in high
    throughput case it is not acceptable.

    For me probably a .get_private_area / .put_private_area like API would
    be desirable where I can give the pointer of the 'metadata' are (and
    size) to the user.

    But these can co-exist in my opinion and DMA drivers can opt to
    implement none, either or both of the callbacks.

    In couple of days I can update the metadata patches I have atm and send
    as RFC.

    Is there anything from your side I should take into account when doing that?

    - Péter

    Texas Instruments Finland Oy, Porkkalankatu 22, 00180 Helsinki.
    Y-tunnus/Business ID: 0615521-4. Kotipaikka/Domicile: Helsinki

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2018-05-29 17:04    [W:4.173 / U:0.076 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site