Hi Laurent,
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 1:19 AM, Laurent Pinchart laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com wrote:
I actually have the opposite problem, in my case channels of physically separate DMA engines can be used interchangeably to serve the system's slaves. Using the DMA engine DT bindings, DT nodes of the slaves currently reference a specific DMA engine, even if they can be served by both. This leads to limited dynamic channel allocation capabilities (especially when taking into account lazy channel allocation as mentioned in another mail in this thread).
What about adding a property to the first one, referencing the second (or the other way around, don't know what's the easiest to implement)?
dmac0: dma-controller@e6700000 { ... renesas,alternative = <&dmac1>; ... };
dmac1: dma-controller@e6720000 { ... };
That would avoid having to bind a slave device explicitly to a single dmac, or having to bind all slave devices to all dmacs.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
-- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds