Thread (48 messages) 48 messages, 6 authors, 2018-07-18

Re: [PATCH 05/14] dmaengine: dma-jz4780: Add support for the JZ4740 SoC

From: Vinod <vkoul@kernel.org>
Date: 2018-07-17 15:34:19
Also in: dmaengine, linux-devicetree, lkml

On 16-07-18, 15:33, Rob Herring wrote:
On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 10:42:26PM +0530, Vinod wrote:
quoted
On 03-07-18, 14:32, Paul Cercueil wrote:
quoted
 enum jz_version {
+	ID_JZ4740,
 	ID_JZ4770,
 	ID_JZ4780,
 };
@@ -247,6 +248,7 @@ static void jz4780_dma_desc_free(struct virt_dma_desc *vdesc)
 }
 
 static const unsigned int jz4780_dma_ord_max[] = {
+	[ID_JZ4740] = 5,
 	[ID_JZ4770] = 6,
 	[ID_JZ4780] = 7,
 };
@@ -801,11 +803,13 @@ static struct dma_chan *jz4780_of_dma_xlate(struct of_phandle_args *dma_spec,
 }
 
 static const unsigned int jz4780_dma_nb_channels[] = {
+	[ID_JZ4740] = 6,
 	[ID_JZ4770] = 6,
 	[ID_JZ4780] = 32,
 };
I feel these should be done away with if we describe hardware in DT
The compatible property can imply things like this.
So what is the general recommendation, let DT describe hardware
including version delta or use compatible to code that in driver?

Is it documented anywhere?

-- 
~Vinod
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help