On Fri, 2018-06-08 at 13:59 -0800, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi,
On 3 June 2018 at 23:14, Chee, Tien Fong tien.fong.chee@intel.com wrote:
On Fri, 2018-06-01 at 08:25 -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi,
On 31 May 2018 at 02:08, tien.fong.chee@intel.com wrote:
From: Tien Fong Chee tien.fong.chee@intel.com
Update the dma_memcpy description on return argument for DMA330 driver.
Signed-off-by: Tien Fong Chee tien.fong.chee@intel.com
include/dma.h | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/dma.h b/include/dma.h index 0a0c9dd..b825c1e 100644 --- a/include/dma.h +++ b/include/dma.h @@ -79,8 +79,8 @@ int dma_get_device(u32 transfer_type, struct udevice **devp); * @dst - destination pointer * @src - souce pointer * @len - data length to be copied
- @return - on successful transfer returns no of bytes
- transferred and on failure return error code.
- @return - on successful transfer returns no of bytes or
zero(for DMA330)
- * transferred and on failure return error code.
This is a public API so you cannot change it just for one device. You can change the API for everyone if you like.
But why would it want to return 0?
Because we only able to check the DMA tranferring status, full transfer or failed. I can return the len argument user set if full tranfer is finished.
OK. My concern is that you have a comment saying that the function does something different for one device versus others. This is not the place for such a comment. Here you can just document that it can return two possible meanings. You should add comments explaining what 0 means too (e.g. completed, but length unknown?).
For something in progress, you should use -EINPROGRESS / -EAGAIN
Okay.
Regards, Simon