On Tue, 13 Jan 2015 19:54:15 +0000
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 09:41:01PM +0200, Jyri Sarha wrote:
> > On 01/13/2015 09:26 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > >SCLK: _~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_
> > > WS: __~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~________________________________~
> > >I2S1: llmm............................llmm............................llm
> > >I2S2: llmm............................llmm............................llm
> > >I2S3: llmm............................llmm............................llm
> > >I2S4: llmm............................llmm............................llm
> > >
> > >So, what I'm saying is that it is_impossible_ to drive the TDA998x using
> > >multiple I2S streams which are not produced by the same I2S block.
> >
> > This is besides the point, but it is possible that one of the multiple I2S
> > blocks is the bit-clock and frame-clock master to the i2s bus and the others
> > are slaves to it (banging their bits according to SCLK and WS of the I2S
> > master). However, in this situation there really is only one i2s bus with
> > multiple data pins.
> >
> > Just my 0.02€ to this discussion.
>
> Right, that's about the only way it could work.
>
> To represent that in DT, I would imagine we'd need something like this:
>
> #address-cells = <1>;
> #size-cells = <0>;
> ...
> port@1 { /* AP1,2 = I2S */
> #address-cells = <1>;
> #size-cells = <0>;
> port-type = "i2s";
> reg = <0x01>; /* WS */
> tda998x_i2s1: endpoint@2 {
> reg = <0x02>; /* AP1 */
> remote-endpoint = <&audio1_i2s>;
> };
> tda998x_i2s2: endpoint@4 {
> reg = <0x04>; /* AP2 */
> remote-endpoint = <&audio2_i2s>;
> };
> };
>
> where audio1_i2s is operating in master mode, and audio2_i2s is
> operating in slave mode for both WS and SCLK.
>
> If we can agree on that, then I'm happy with the proposed binding.
> (Remember that #address-cells and #size-cells are required in the
> parent where we have reg= in the child.)
#address-cells and #size-cells may be defined in any of the upper
parent, so, as it is defined in the device, it is not needed in the
port (see of_n_addr_cells in drivers/of/base.c).
Well, I am a bit lost between (only one source / many channels - I2S
busses) and (many sources / one I2s bus!).
Anyway, I don't understand your example.
I'd expect that a port would be a DAI.
If yes, when playing is active, both endpoints receive an audio stream
from the remote audio devices, and the AP register is always set to
0x07 (= 0x01 | 0x02 | 0x04).
Then, it would have been simpler to have:
#address-cells = <1>;
#size-cells = <0>;
...
port@7 { /* AP1,2 = I2S */
port-type = "i2s";
reg = <0x07>; /* WS + AP1 + AP2 */
tda998x_i2s1: endpoint@1 {
remote-endpoint = <&audio1_i2s>;
};
tda998x_i2s2: endpoint@2 {
remote-endpoint = <&audio2_i2s>;
};
};
If no, the two DAIs must be created from the endpoints, permitting
streaming on i2s1 alone, i2s2 alone or both i2s1+i2s2 at the same time.
Then, it would have been simpler to define the DAIs from the ports:
#address-cells = <1>;
#size-cells = <0>;
...
port@3 { /* AP1 = I2S */
port-type = "i2s";
reg = <0x03>; /* WS + AP1 */
tda998x_i2s1: endpoint {
remote-endpoint = <&audio1_i2s>;
};
};
port@5 { /* AP2 = I2S */
port-type = "i2s";
reg = <0x05>; /* WS + AP2 */
tda998x_i2s1: endpoint {
remote-endpoint = <&audio1_i2s>;
};
};
--
Ken ar c'hentañ | ** Breizh ha Linux atav! **
Jef | http://moinejf.free.fr/
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
