[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7aa5b8c1-1d54-4d40-8822-5e79d0fdc4b5@amd.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2026 09:19:26 +0100
From: Michal Simek <michal.simek@....com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...ux.dev>,
"Dhanunjanrao, Katta" <katta.dhanunjanrao@....com>,
"Sagar, Vishal" <vishal.sagar@....com>
Cc: Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, linux-sound@...r.kernel.org,
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ASoC: xilinx: xlnx_i2s: Discover parameters from
registers
+Katta, Vishal
On 1/29/26 19:46, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 01:17:45PM -0500, Sean Anderson wrote:
>> On 1/29/26 13:09, Mark Brown wrote:
>
>>>> - Driver authors tend to use them even when there are hardware registers
>>>> available with the same information, as Xilinx has not always been
>>>> consistent in adding such registers.
>
>>> I'm not sure I follow your second point - driver authors tend to use
>>> what?
>
>> Authors look at the devicetree node and see something like
>
>> and go "Ah, there are the properties I need." On some Xilinx cores this
>> is the only way to discover certain properties, so people have gotten into
>> the habit of using them even when these properties can be read from the
>> device itself.
>
> Oh. If the properties are there it's reasonable and sensible to use
> them, them being redundant is a concern when specifying the binding but
> once things are there any discrepency should usually be resolved in
> favour of the binding.
Let me add our driver owner of this device to answer some questions.
Katta: Can you please look at it?
Thanks,
Michal
Powered by blists - more mailing lists