On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 09:21:18AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 12-03-22, 23:36, Kuldeep Singh wrote:
> > Reorder dmas and dma-names property for spi controller node to make it
> > compliant with bindings.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Kuldeep Singh <singh.kuldeep87k@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> What about a fixes tag ?
Sure, will add one.
> > ---
> > arch/arm/boot/dts/spear13xx.dtsi | 5 ++---
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/spear13xx.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/spear13xx.dtsi
> > index c87b881b2c8b..45f0b2a33e02 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/spear13xx.dtsi
> > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/spear13xx.dtsi
> > @@ -284,9 +284,8 @@ spi0: spi@e0100000 {
> > #size-cells = <0>;
> > interrupts = <0 31 0x4>;
> > status = "disabled";
> > - dmas = <&dwdma0 4 0 0>,
> > - <&dwdma0 5 0 0>;
> > - dma-names = "tx", "rx";
> > + dmas = <&dwdma0 5 0 0>, <&dwdma0 4 0 0>;
> > + dma-names = "rx", "tx";
>
> Why does the order matter here since we have dma-names anyway, which
> was correct earlier ?
Dma-names order matters here.
As per pl022 binding, dma-names order specify rx,tx and all DTs which
have tx,rx as order start raising dtbs_chek warning. Thus, need to
reverse this order. Please note, no functional change in this patch
apart from just fixing warning.
Warning:
'rx' was expected
'tx' was expected
Regards
Kuldeep
