Re: [PATCH 1/1] dmaengine: change dmaengine_get_unmap_data() first arg to dma_chan

[Dave Jiang]

On 10/9/26 2:43 AM, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On 22-09-26, 16:09, Dave Jiang wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 9/22/26 11:45 AM, Frank.Li@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>> From: Frank Li <Frank.Li@xxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> Replace the struct device *dev argument with struct dma_chan *chan so
>>> callers do not need to reach into the dma_device internals to obtain
>>> the device pointer.  The implementation now derives the device via
>>> dmaengine_get_dma_device(chan), which correctly handles the per-channel
>>> IOMMU mapping case.
>>>
>>> Prepare to make dma_device private and make dmaengine API consistent.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@xxxxxxx>
>>
>> For the NTB bits:
>> Acked-by: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@xxxxxxxxx>
>>
>>
>>> ---
>>>  crypto/async_tx/async_memcpy.c      | 4 ++--
>>>  crypto/async_tx/async_pq.c          | 4 ++--
>>>  crypto/async_tx/async_raid6_recov.c | 4 ++--
>>>  crypto/async_tx/async_xor.c         | 8 ++++----
>>
>> Maybe one day Dan's wishes will become true and someone will finally deprecate async_tx....
> 
> Does Intel still have use it. I am looking at fixing the names and we
> can drop async_tx completely...? 
> 
I don't think so. Not since ioatdma days. Dan has talked about wanting to remove async_tx for quite a few years now. No idea if there are ARM dma devices that still use that or not.