| Message ID | 1404456361-8197-1-git-send-email-shawn.guo@freescale.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 3:46 AM, Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@freescale.com> wrote: > The SDMA on imx6sl and imx6sx is more compatible with imx6q one than > imx35. Let's use "fsl,imx6q-sdma" instead of "fsl,imx35-sdma", so that > SDMA ROM script on imx6sl and imx6sx can work for audio driver just like > the case of imx6q. > > Reported-by: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@freescale.com> > Signed-off-by: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@freescale.com> > --- > Thanks to Robin for finding this out. Very good! Now I can play audio on mx6sl and mx6sx without the need of loading the external SDMA firmware. However, I still have a question: wouldn't it be better to describe the compatible string as: compatible = "fsl,imx6sl-sdma", "fsl,imx6q-sdma", "fsl,imx35-sdma"; ? Regards, Fabio Estevam
On Fri, Jul 04, 2014 at 10:53:39AM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote: > On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 3:46 AM, Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@freescale.com> wrote: > > The SDMA on imx6sl and imx6sx is more compatible with imx6q one than > > imx35. Let's use "fsl,imx6q-sdma" instead of "fsl,imx35-sdma", so that > > SDMA ROM script on imx6sl and imx6sx can work for audio driver just like > > the case of imx6q. > > > > Reported-by: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@freescale.com> > > Signed-off-by: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@freescale.com> > > --- > > Thanks to Robin for finding this out. > > Very good! Now I can play audio on mx6sl and mx6sx without the need of > loading the external SDMA firmware. > > However, I still have a question: wouldn't it be better to describe > the compatible string as: > compatible = "fsl,imx6sl-sdma", "fsl,imx6q-sdma", "fsl,imx35-sdma"; ? No, it wouldn't be better or necessary. Shawn
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 11:55 AM, Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@freescale.com> wrote: >> However, I still have a question: wouldn't it be better to describe >> the compatible string as: >> compatible = "fsl,imx6sl-sdma", "fsl,imx6q-sdma", "fsl,imx35-sdma"; ? > > No, it wouldn't be better or necessary. I have some trouble understanding when/if the three elements need to be passed into the compatible string. For example: on mx6sl ssi node: ssi1: ssi@02028000 { compatible = "fsl,imx6sl-ssi", "fsl,imx51-ssi", "fsl,imx21-ssi"; However on mx6sx node we have: ssi1: ssi@02028000 { compatible = "fsl,imx6sx-ssi", "fsl,imx21-ssi"; Which one is correct? Care to explain?
On Fri, Jul 04, 2014 at 12:47:46PM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote: > On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 11:55 AM, Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@freescale.com> wrote: > > >> However, I still have a question: wouldn't it be better to describe > >> the compatible string as: > >> compatible = "fsl,imx6sl-sdma", "fsl,imx6q-sdma", "fsl,imx35-sdma"; ? > > > > No, it wouldn't be better or necessary. > > I have some trouble understanding when/if the three elements need to > be passed into the compatible string. > > For example: on mx6sl ssi node: > > ssi1: ssi@02028000 { > compatible = "fsl,imx6sl-ssi", > "fsl,imx51-ssi", > "fsl,imx21-ssi"; I would say either one below is correct. - compatible = "fsl,imx6sl-ssi", "fsl,imx51-ssi", "fsl,imx21-ssi"; - compatible = "fsl,imx6sl-ssi", "fsl,imx51-ssi"; But when commit 98ea6ad2edd2 (ARM: dts: imx6: use imx51-ssi) updates the compatible, it might be better to just replace "fsl,imx21-ssi" with "fsl,imx51-ssi". > > However on mx6sx node we have: > > ssi1: ssi@02028000 { > compatible = "fsl,imx6sx-ssi", "fsl,imx21-ssi"; > > Which one is correct? Care to explain? This one is incorrect now. The "fsl,imx21-ssi" should be replaced by "fsl,imx51-ssi" per commit above. Care to send a patch for it? Shawn
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6sl.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6sl.dtsi index c0ee12f1f171..0467ac064e9d 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6sl.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6sl.dtsi @@ -608,7 +608,7 @@ }; sdma: sdma@020ec000 { - compatible = "fsl,imx6sl-sdma", "fsl,imx35-sdma"; + compatible = "fsl,imx6sl-sdma", "fsl,imx6q-sdma"; reg = <0x020ec000 0x4000>; interrupts = <0 2 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; clocks = <&clks IMX6SL_CLK_SDMA>, diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6sx.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6sx.dtsi index 92d48becdb45..0c5094adedfa 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6sx.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6sx.dtsi @@ -706,7 +706,7 @@ }; sdma: sdma@020ec000 { - compatible = "fsl,imx6sx-sdma", "fsl,imx35-sdma"; + compatible = "fsl,imx6sx-sdma", "fsl,imx6q-sdma"; reg = <0x020ec000 0x4000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 2 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; clocks = <&clks IMX6SX_CLK_SDMA>,
The SDMA on imx6sl and imx6sx is more compatible with imx6q one than imx35. Let's use "fsl,imx6q-sdma" instead of "fsl,imx35-sdma", so that SDMA ROM script on imx6sl and imx6sx can work for audio driver just like the case of imx6q. Reported-by: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@freescale.com> Signed-off-by: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@freescale.com> --- Thanks to Robin for finding this out. arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6sl.dtsi | 2 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6sx.dtsi | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)