Re: [PATCH V5 2/2] ASoC: SAMSUNG: Add DT support for i2s
From: Padma Venkat <hidden>
Date: 2012-12-24 04:03:18
Also in:
alsa-devel, linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc
Hi, On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 12:32 AM, Kukjin Kim [off-list ref] wrote:
Padma Venkat wrote:quoted
Hi, On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 10:39 PM, Mark Brown [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 01:24:14PM +0000, Grant Likely wrote:quoted
On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 16:12:53 +0530, Padmavathi Venna[off-list ref] wrote:quoted
quoted
quoted
+- compatible : "samsung,samsung-i2s"quoted
Isn't that kind of redundant? :-)quoted
The format of the compatible strings should be "<vendor>,<part-number>-i2s".quoted
quoted
Please be specific about the part number that you're doing the binding for. For example; use "samsung,exynos4210-i2s" instead of"samsung,exynos-i2s".quoted
There are actually versioned IPs here (where the versions are used publically in a few places) but it's not clearly documented which is which. It would be reasonable to use the IP versions here I think.Samsung has three i2s drivers one for s3c24xx, one for s3c2412 and one for rest of the platforms. The above mentioned other platforms has Version 3/4/5 of i2s controllers. This dt binding is for for the i2sWhere is the version defined such as 3, 4, 5? So, what is the "sound/soc/Samsung/s3c-i2s-v2.[ch]"?
Versions 3, 4, 5 are defined in dev-audio.c file of corresponding platforms. s3c-i2s-v2 is used in s3c2412 platform.
quoted
driver that has support for Version 3/4/5 of i2s controller. So "samsung,i2s-v5" is okay as compatible name? Please suggest me.I agree with using version here but we need some consensus about that. - Kukjin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Thanks Padma