Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1321479 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH 3/4] dmaengine: qcom_bam_dma: use correct pipe FIFO size

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH 3/4] dmaengine: qcom_bam_dma: use correct pipe FIFO size Andy Gross <andy.gross@linaro.org> - 2016-01-29 05:40 +0100

#1321479 — Re: [PATCH 3/4] dmaengine: qcom_bam_dma: use correct pipe FIFO size

On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 03:18:33PM +0200, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:

<snip>

> >>> This is just using the #define.  That is ok, but if you use this instead of the
> >>> BAM_P_FIFO_SIZES then you need to fix your comment.  Or actually use the
> >>> register value.... otherwise looks fine.
> >>
> >> I did not follow your comment, but the intension of the patch is to set
> >> the proper FIFO size in BAM_P_FIFO_SIZES register, i.e. 32K - 8.
> > 
> > Sorry, I mixed up the usage and was thinking there was something you read out
> > that told you the size.  That's not how it works, unfortunately.  The
> > MAX_DATA_SIZE is fine, but the name is a little misleading.  Perhaps just
> > BAM_FIFO_SIZE?
> 
> OK I can rename BAM_MAX_DATA_SIZE to BAM_FIFO_SIZE, and use it when
> setting BAM_P_FIFO_SIZES register. Is that fine to you?

Yes that's fine with me.

[toc] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web