From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: shawn.guo@linaro.org (Shawn Guo) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 15:34:01 +0800 Subject: [PATCH v3] sdma-imx: Add SDMA firmware for Freescale i.MX SOCs In-Reply-To: References: <1358437708-18717-1-git-send-email-fabio.estevam@freescale.com> Message-ID: <20130121073358.GD2272@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 01:13:14PM -0600, Matt Sealey wrote: > > imx/sdma/sdma-imx25.bin | Bin 0 -> 694 bytes > > imx/sdma/sdma-imx31.bin | Bin 0 -> 3762 bytes > > imx/sdma/sdma-imx35.bin | Bin 0 -> 1746 bytes > > imx/sdma/sdma-imx51.bin | Bin 0 -> 1894 bytes > > imx/sdma/sdma-imx53.bin | Bin 0 -> 1406 bytes > > imx/sdma/sdma-imx6q.bin | Bin 0 -> 1838 bytes > > Hi Fabio, > > You are an absolute star; but I would suggest only that sdma-imx6q.bin > is misnamed here, since this firmware works on *all* i.MX6 models > (Quad, Dual, DualLite, Solo, SoloLite) and not just q for Quad.. is > there any reason why it would have to have this very > SoC-variant-specific naming convention if we also dropped support for > naming tapeouts for each chip? > SoC-variant-specific naming convention is widely used in device tree binding for versioning. I would say in this case that all other i.MX6 models' SDMA firmware is completely compatible with imx6q's. Shawn