Am Sonntag, den 27.01.2019, 23:08 -0700 schrieb Angus Ainslie (Purism):
> This is identical to the imx7d.
So it can be dropped and the i.MX8M DT should just specify the
"fsl,imx7d-sdma" as a fallback compatible for the SDMA codes.
If both the imx8m and imx7d compatible are present in the DT, we can
introduce a more specific matchic when we actually need it. No need to
pollute the code with this from the start.
Regards,
Lucas
> Signed-off-by: Angus Ainslie (Purism) <angus@xxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c b/drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c
> index 757fad2fbfae..c4db4fe6bcc9 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c
> @@ -578,6 +578,9 @@ static const struct platform_device_id
> sdma_devtypes[] = {
> }, {
> .name = "imx7d-sdma",
> .driver_data = (unsigned long)&sdma_imx7d,
> + }, {
> + .name = "imx8mq-sdma",
> + .driver_data = (unsigned long)&sdma_imx7d,
> }, {
> /* sentinel */
> }
> @@ -592,6 +595,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id sdma_dt_ids[] =
> {
> { .compatible = "fsl,imx31-sdma", .data = &sdma_imx31, },
> { .compatible = "fsl,imx25-sdma", .data = &sdma_imx25, },
> { .compatible = "fsl,imx7d-sdma", .data = &sdma_imx7d, },
> + { .compatible = "fsl,imx8mq-sdma", .data = &sdma_imx7d, },
> { /* sentinel */ }
> };
> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, sdma_dt_ids);
