Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 20 Jan 2022 10:51:55 -0800 (PST) | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] dt-bindings: Add dma-channels for pdma device node | From | Palmer Dabbelt <> |
| |
On Sun, 16 Jan 2022 17:35:27 PST (-0800), zong.li@sifive.com wrote: > Add dma-channels property, then we can determine how many channels there > by device tree, rather than statically defines it in PDMA driver
Maybe "statically defining it" is better here?
> > Signed-off-by: Zong Li <zong.li@sifive.com> > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/dma/sifive,fu540-c000-pdma.yaml | 7 +++++++ > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/sifive,fu540-c000-pdma.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/sifive,fu540-c000-pdma.yaml > index d32a71b975fe..3dbb8caefc17 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/sifive,fu540-c000-pdma.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/sifive,fu540-c000-pdma.yaml > @@ -34,6 +34,12 @@ properties: > minItems: 1 > maxItems: 8 > > + dma-channels: > + description: For backwards-compatible, the default value is 4
Maybe "backwards-compatibility" is better here?
> + minimum: 1 > + maximum: 4 > + default: 4 > + > '#dma-cells': > const: 1 > > @@ -50,6 +56,7 @@ examples: > dma@3000000 { > compatible = "sifive,fu540-c000-pdma";
IMO we should have a "sifive,pdma-1.0.0" (or whatever the versioning scheme ended up being) here, in addition to the SOC-specific DT entry. It's kind of odd to start extending the SOC-specific DT entry, as the whole idea there is to let us have an out in case we find future compatibility issues.
> reg = <0x3000000 0x8000>; > + dma-channels = <4>; > interrupts = <23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30>; > #dma-cells = <1>; > };
| |