On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 11:04:39AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 02:15:29PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > SoC info is in compatible, so there's no reason to make it a property. > > > > that's why it would need to be optional for the SoC's that needs these.. > > There's nothing optional about that behaviour, it's mandatory for the > SoC that need it, and useless on the SoC that don't. And why should kernel put strings for each hw behaviour. I am expecting DT to tell me if this SoC is a special case or not and kernel shall handle accordingly > Plus, that would require changing the DT binding, which isn't > something we can do. Any reason why bindings can't change..? I though this was support for new SoC... -- ~Vinod -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dmaengine" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
