[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3c6c5be1-fb8e-4bf0-9f58-cfb09672e8c1@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2024 17:22:41 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Péter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...il.com>,
Mighty <bavishimithil@...il.com>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Lopez Cruz <misael.lopez@...com>,
linux-sound@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] ASoC: dt-bindings: omap-mcpdm: Convert to DT schema
On 22/05/2024 16:43, Péter Ujfalusi wrote:
>>>
>>>> + compatible = "ti,omap4-mcpdm";
>>>> + reg = <0x40132000 0x7f>, /* MPU private access */
>>>> + <0x49032000 0x7f>; /* L3 Interconnect */
>>>> + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 112 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>>>> + interrupt-parent = <&gic>;
>>>> + ti,hwmods = "mcpdm";
>>>> + clocks = <&twl6040>;
>>>> + clock-names = "pdmclk";
>>>
>>> The clocks cannot be added at the time when the node is defined, it is
>>> board specific. This way you imply that it is OK to have it in main dtsi
>>> file. It is not.
>>
>> Wait, what? That's example and pretty standard. Example should be
>> complete. This is not an exceptional binding.
>
> The fclk for the McPDM is coming from external source, and the McPDM is
> designed in pair with twl6040/6041, there were plan for other codecs to
> support the McPDM protocol and in those cases the clock would come from
> the connected codec.
>
> The example (as the original binding was bit rot) is missing reg-names,
> dmas and dma-names to be complete.
None of these properties are allowed by the binding and during these
five/six revisions of the patchset no one raised missing properties.
I assume the DTS was validated with the binding. Isn't the case here?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists