On 2019-05-27 at 11:05 +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 04:51:17PM +0800, yibin.gong@xxxxxxx wrote:
> >
> > From: Robin Gong <yibin.gong@xxxxxxx>
> >
> > +static const struct of_device_id fsl_edma_dt_ids[] = {
> > + { .compatible = "fsl,vf610-edma", .data = (void *)v1 },
> > + { .compatible = "fsl,imx7ulp-edma", .data = (void *)v3 },
> > + { /* sentinel */ }
> Please put a struct type behind the .data pointer so that you can
> configure...
But current only version needed, so I give up struct define....
>
> >
> > +};
> > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, fsl_edma_dt_ids);
> > +
> > @@ -218,6 +272,22 @@ static int fsl_edma_probe(struct
> > platform_device *pdev)
> > fsl_edma_setup_regs(fsl_edma);
> > regs = &fsl_edma->regs;
> >
> > + if (fsl_edma->version == v3) {
> > + fsl_edma->dmamux_nr = 1;
> ...things like this...
Yes, dmamux_nr could be moved to struct at least.
>
> >
> > @@ -264,7 +334,11 @@ static int fsl_edma_probe(struct
> > platform_device *pdev)
> > }
> >
> > edma_writel(fsl_edma, ~0, regs->intl);
> > - ret = fsl_edma_irq_init(pdev, fsl_edma);
> > +
> > + if (fsl_edma->version == v3)
> > + ret = fsl_edma2_irq_init(pdev, fsl_edma);
> > + else
> > + ret = fsl_edma_irq_init(pdev, fsl_edma);
> ...and this one in that struct rather than littering the code more
> and
> more with such version tests.
Yes, such irq setup function could be moved to struct, thus, no version
test in this file. Will refine it in v3.
>
> Sascha
>
