quoted

quoted

quoted

+static int fsl_sai_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) {

[...]

quoted

+
+	sai->dma_params_rx.addr =3D res->start + SAI_RDR;
+	sai->dma_params_rx.maxburst =3D 6;
+	index =3D of_property_match_string(np, "dma-names", "rx");
+	ret =3D of_parse_phandle_with_args(np, "dmas", "#dma-cells",

index,

quoted

quoted

quoted

+				&dma_args);
+	if (ret)
+		return ret;
+	sai->dma_params_rx.slave_id =3D dma_args.args[1];
+
+	sai->dma_params_tx.addr =3D res->start + SAI_TDR;
+	sai->dma_params_tx.maxburst =3D 6;
+	index =3D of_property_match_string(np, "dma-names", "tx");
+	ret =3D of_parse_phandle_with_args(np, "dmas", "#dma-cells",

index,

quoted

quoted

quoted

+				&dma_args);
+	if (ret)
+		return ret;
+	sai->dma_params_tx.slave_id =3D dma_args.args[1];

The driver should not have to manually parse the dma devicetree
properties, this is something that should be handled by the dma
engine driver.

What do you think about the DMA slave_id ?
I have been noticed by one colleague that this should be parsed here,
which is from your opinions ?

Sure slave_id can be parsed here, but IMO it should be programmed via the
dma_slave_confog into the respective channel
=20

Actually, these are parsed for cpu_dai->playback_dma_data and cpu_dai->capt=
ure_dma_data dynamically, whose type is struct dma_slave_config.

And now I must parse them here, because the platform eDMA driver's newest v=
ersion will check and use the slave_ids to select and configure the eDMA ch=
annels via dma_device->device_control().=20

--
Xiubo