| Message ID | 20210103101803.2123-1-olek2@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | 6b5ea5b7a7fa35582b1a28bd8853427fb03e1e29 |
| Headers | show |
| Series | dt-bindings: mips: lantiq: Document Lantiq Xway DMA bindings | expand |
On Sun, 03 Jan 2021 11:18:03 +0100, Aleksander Jan Bajkowski wrote: > Document the Lantiq Xway SoC DMA Controller DT bindings. > > Signed-off-by: Aleksander Jan Bajkowski <olek2@wp.pl> > --- > .../bindings/mips/lantiq/lantiq,dma-xway.yaml | 32 +++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/lantiq/lantiq,dma-xway.yaml > Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
On Sun, Jan 03, 2021 at 11:18:03AM +0100, Aleksander Jan Bajkowski wrote: > Document the Lantiq Xway SoC DMA Controller DT bindings. > > Signed-off-by: Aleksander Jan Bajkowski <olek2@wp.pl> > --- > .../bindings/mips/lantiq/lantiq,dma-xway.yaml | 32 +++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/lantiq/lantiq,dma-xway.yaml applied to mips-next. Thomas. -- Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessarily a good idea. [ RFC1925, 2.3 ]
(another late reply from me, sorry) > +required: > + - compatible > + - reg This is actually an older IP variant of what can be found in the Intel LGM SoCs. The dt-bindings are currently being upstreamed for that newer SoC in [0]. Based on "DOs and DON’Ts for designing and writing Devicetree bindings" I think some more mandatory properties are needed, even though our driver currently uses none of them: - interrupts: as far as I know the IP on the Lantiq SoCs has (at least) one interrupt for each DMA channel. That means: 28 interrupts on the xRX200 SoCs - I *assume* (but I have not researched if that's really the case) that the Lantiq variant also has at least one clock input and a reset line - since we don't have a proper DMA driver yet I can't comment what we should use for #dma-cells > +examples: > + - | > + dma@e104100 { note to self: it seems that both dma@ and dma-controller@ are used in existing schemas (the latter having twice as many occurrences though): $ grep -R dma@ Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/* | wc -l 20 $ grep -R dma-controller@ Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/* | wc -l 45 Best regards, Martin [0] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/devicetree-bindings/patch/0864b9bfa6e2b8b5e7ad9a7a739ca3274f66493c.1610703653.git.mallikarjunax.reddy@linux.intel.com/ [1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.html
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/lantiq/lantiq,dma-xway.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/lantiq/lantiq,dma-xway.yaml new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..40130fefa2b4 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/lantiq/lantiq,dma-xway.yaml @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@ +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) +%YAML 1.2 +--- +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/mips/lantiq/lantiq,dma-xway.yaml# +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# + +title: Lantiq Xway SoCs DMA Controller DT bindings + +maintainers: + - John Crispin <john@phrozen.org> + +properties: + compatible: + items: + - enum: + - lantiq,dma-xway + + reg: + maxItems: 1 + +required: + - compatible + - reg + +additionalProperties: false + +examples: + - | + dma@e104100 { + compatible = "lantiq,dma-xway"; + reg = <0xe104100 0x800>; + };
Document the Lantiq Xway SoC DMA Controller DT bindings. Signed-off-by: Aleksander Jan Bajkowski <olek2@wp.pl> --- .../bindings/mips/lantiq/lantiq,dma-xway.yaml | 32 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/lantiq/lantiq,dma-xway.yaml