On 06/26/2017 09:33 PM, Rob Herring wrote:

On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 03:00:51PM +0200, Pierre-Yves MORDRET wrote:

quoted

This patch adds an optional property needed for STM32 DMA controller
addressed via STM32 DMAMUX.

Signed-off-by: M'boumba Cedric Madianga <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Pierre-Yves MORDRET <redacted>
---
  Version history:
     v2:
         * Typo fix
---
---
  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/stm32-dma.txt | 5 ++++-
  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/stm32-dma.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/stm32-dma.txt
index 4408af6..340c918 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/stm32-dma.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/stm32-dma.txt

@@ -16,6 +16,9 @@ Optional properties:
  - resets: Reference to a reset controller asserting the DMA controller
  - st,mem2mem: boolean; if defined, it indicates that the controller supports
    memory-to-memory transfer
+- st,dmamux: boolean; if defined, it indicates that the controller is behind a
+  DMA multiplexer. In that case, using dma instances doesn't work for DMA
+  clients. They have to use dma-router instances.

Won't this be obvious looking at the bindings for clients?

In any case, this should be implied by the compatible string.

Rob

Not sure what you are asking here.

Py