lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Dec]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] dmaengine: qcom: bam_dma: Add LOCK and UNLOCK flag bit support
From
Date


On 12/21/20 2:35 AM, mdalam@codeaurora.org wrote:
> On 2020-12-19 09:05, Thara Gopinath wrote:
>> On 12/17/20 9:37 AM, Md Sadre Alam wrote:
>>> This change will add support for LOCK & UNLOCK flag bit support
>>> on CMD descriptor.
>>>
>>> If DMA_PREP_LOCK flag passed in prep_slave_sg then requester of this
>>> transaction wanted to lock the DMA controller for this transaction so
>>> BAM driver should set LOCK bit for the HW descriptor.
>>>
>>> If DMA_PREP_UNLOCK flag passed in prep_slave_sg then requester of this
>>> transaction wanted to unlock the DMA controller.so BAM driver should set
>>> UNLOCK bit for the HW descriptor.
>> Hi,
>>
>> This is a generic question. What is the point of LOCK/UNLOCK with
>> allocating LOCK groups to the individual dma channels? By default
>> doesn't all channels fall in the same group. This would mean that
>> a lock does not prevent the dma controller from not executing a
>> transaction on the other channels.
>>
>
> The Pipe Locking/Unlocking will be only on command-descriptor.
> Upon encountering a command descriptor with LOCK bit set, the BAM
> will lock all other pipes not related to the current pipe group, and keep
> handling the current pipe only until it sees the UNLOCK set then it will
> release all locked pipes.

So unless you assign pipe groups, this will not work as intended right?
So this patch is only half of the solution. There should also be a patch
allowing pipe groups to be assigned. Without that extra bit this patch
does nothing , right ?


--
Warm Regards
Thara

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-12-21 19:12    [W:0.116 / U:0.136 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site