Hi Alexander,
Apologies for the late reply. DT-related email is somewhat a firehose
and unfortunately I lose track of things.
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 02:59:19PM +0100, Alexander Popov wrote:
2014-06-18 18:56 GMT+04:00 Alexander Popov [off-list ref]:
quoted
2014-06-18 17:37 GMT+04:00 Mark Rutland [off-list ref]:
quoted
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 11:48:10AM +0100, Alexander Popov wrote:
quoted
Introduce a device tree binding document for the MPC512x DMA controller
+Optional properties:
+- #dma-cells: the length of the DMA specifier, must be <1>.
+ Each channel of this DMA controller has a peripheral request line,
+ the assignment is fixed in hardware. This one cell
+ in dmas property of a client device represents the channel number.
Surely this is required to be able to refer to DMA channels on the
device?
Excuse me, I didn't understand your question.
Do you inquire about the reason of making #dma-cells an optional property?
It's optional because device tree based lookup support is made
optional (part 3/3).
Mark, did I answer your question?
Should I fix anything in this patch series?
I would move it under required properties even if we happen to not use
it in certain edge cases.
Moving forwards everything should be DT-driven, so it'll be necessary.
Thanks,
Mark.