Hi Maxime,

On 08/09/17 15:39, Maxime Ripard wrote:

Hi,

On Mon, Sep 04, 2017 at 09:14:52AM +0100, Andr? Przywara wrote:

quoted

quoted

And obviously, while maintaining the stability of the binding of those
hundreds properties.

Or, you can base all this on the compatible, and be done with it once
and for all.

What I am after is to cover SoCs which *don't* have differences in their
register layout, for instance A83T, H3, A64, R40.
In an ideal world we could have reused the H3 compatible string,
adjusting the number of channels for each SoC in the DT.

So I see that having a generic compatible name will not fly, as we now
have differences which should not be modelled by DT properties.
But I still think we should try to cover those non-register differences
(number of channels) with a DT property, to allow reusing the existing
driver code whenever possible. As is stands with this series, the R40
support should just be a matter of:
	compatible = "allwinner,sun8i-r40-dma",
		     "allwinner,sun50i-a64-dma";

I just suggested the exact same thing, and then saw your mail, so I
guess we have an agreement :)

Yes, I was thinking so as well.
Since my DeLorean is in the garage ;-) we have no other choice than
doing so.
My original suggestion for a generic name was based on my naive reading
of the existing code, which *looked like* it would be all compatible.
But as we know better now, this is the way to go.

Merci,
Andr?