From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kukjin Kim Subject: RE: [PATCH V5 2/2] ASoC: SAMSUNG: Add DT support for i2s Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 09:37:28 -0800 Message-ID: <007401cdde0f$86096210$921c2630$@samsung.com> References: <1355395373-22058-1-git-send-email-padma.v@samsung.com> <1355395373-22058-3-git-send-email-padma.v@samsung.com> <20121219132414.2CF653E0AD7@localhost> <20121219170937.GV4985@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-reply-to: Content-language: en-us List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-arm-kernel-bounces@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: 'Mark Brown' , 'Grant Likely' Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, 'Padmavathi Venna' , sbkim73@samsung.com, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, jassisinghbrar@gmail.com, tiwai@suse.de, ben-linux@fluff.org, lrg@ti.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org Kukjin Kim wrote: > > Mark Brown wrote: > > > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 01:24:14PM +0000, Grant Likely wrote: > > > On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 16:12:53 +0530, Padmavathi Venna > > wrote: > > > > > > +- compatible : "samsung,samsung-i2s" > > > > > Isn't that kind of redundant? :-) > > > > > The format of the compatible strings should be ", number>- > > i2s". > > > Please be specific about the part number that you're doing the binding > > > for. For example; use "samsung,exynos4210-i2s" instead of > > "samsung,exynos-i2s". > > > > There are actually versioned IPs here (where the versions are used > > publically in a few places) but it's not clearly documented which is > > which. It would be reasonable to use the IP versions here I think. > Oops, I'm resending due to problem of my e-mail client. > I agree with Mark Brown. That makes sense, for example, see mfc. > compatible = "samsung,mfc-v6" > Same versioned IPs can be used on different SoCs, so in my opinion, in this > case, to use version is more clear. > - Kukjin From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: kgene.kim@samsung.com (Kukjin Kim) Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 09:37:28 -0800 Subject: [PATCH V5 2/2] ASoC: SAMSUNG: Add DT support for i2s References: <1355395373-22058-1-git-send-email-padma.v@samsung.com> <1355395373-22058-3-git-send-email-padma.v@samsung.com> <20121219132414.2CF653E0AD7@localhost> <20121219170937.GV4985@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Message-ID: <007401cdde0f$86096210$921c2630$@samsung.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Kukjin Kim wrote: > > Mark Brown wrote: > > > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 01:24:14PM +0000, Grant Likely wrote: > > > On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 16:12:53 +0530, Padmavathi Venna > > wrote: > > > > > > +- compatible : "samsung,samsung-i2s" > > > > > Isn't that kind of redundant? :-) > > > > > The format of the compatible strings should be ", number>- > > i2s". > > > Please be specific about the part number that you're doing the binding > > > for. For example; use "samsung,exynos4210-i2s" instead of > > "samsung,exynos-i2s". > > > > There are actually versioned IPs here (where the versions are used > > publically in a few places) but it's not clearly documented which is > > which. It would be reasonable to use the IP versions here I think. > Oops, I'm resending due to problem of my e-mail client. > I agree with Mark Brown. That makes sense, for example, see mfc. > compatible = "samsung,mfc-v6" > Same versioned IPs can be used on different SoCs, so in my opinion, in this > case, to use version is more clear. > - Kukjin