On 27-11-24, 15:46, Vaishnav Achath wrote:
> J722S CSI BCDMA is similar to J721S2 CSI BCDMA but there are slight
> integration differences like different PSIL thread base ID which is
> currently handled in the driver based on udma_of_match data. Add an
> entry to support J722S CSIRX.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vaishnav Achath <vaishnav.a@xxxxxx>
> ---
>
> V2->V3 : Minor edit in commit message.
>
> V1->V2:
> * Add new compatible for J722S instead of modifying AM62A
>
> drivers/dma/ti/k3-udma.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/dma/ti/k3-udma.c b/drivers/dma/ti/k3-udma.c
> index b3f27b3f9209..7ed1956b4642 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma/ti/k3-udma.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma/ti/k3-udma.c
> @@ -4404,6 +4404,18 @@ static struct udma_match_data j721s2_bcdma_csi_data = {
> .soc_data = &j721s2_bcdma_csi_soc_data,
> };
>
> +static struct udma_match_data j722s_bcdma_csi_data = {
> + .type = DMA_TYPE_BCDMA,
> + .psil_base = 0x3100,
> + .enable_memcpy_support = false,
> + .burst_size = {
> + TI_SCI_RM_UDMAP_CHAN_BURST_SIZE_64_BYTES, /* Normal Channels */
> + 0, /* No H Channels */
> + 0, /* No UH Channels */
Why are these zeros? we expect valid size...
> + },
> + .soc_data = &j721s2_bcdma_csi_soc_data,
> +};
> +
> static const struct of_device_id udma_of_match[] = {
> {
> .compatible = "ti,am654-navss-main-udmap",
> @@ -4435,6 +4447,10 @@ static const struct of_device_id udma_of_match[] = {
> .compatible = "ti,j721s2-dmss-bcdma-csi",
> .data = &j721s2_bcdma_csi_data,
> },
> + {
> + .compatible = "ti,j722s-dmss-bcdma-csi",
> + .data = &j722s_bcdma_csi_data,
> + },
> { /* Sentinel */ },
> };
> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, udma_of_match);
> --
> 2.34.1
--
~Vinod
