> > Yet, if I know the compatible property for the mxs I2C driver, and also > > know the CPU type (be it MX23 or MX28), I can deduce from that a lot of > > information, including DMA channel. That is fix. Why encode it? > > You know the compatible and the "fallback compatible". From the later one, you > can deduce nothing if that happens to kick in. Even if the driver was matched because of an MX23-I2C "compatible" binding, both devicetree and runtime could provide data that it actually runs on MX28. That shouldn't be a problem. > btw. the PIO discussion on DT discuss is completely ignored. How shall we > proceed, this driver is stalled for too long. IIRC I mentioned that a discussion about the bindings won't make the next merge window. That's why I proposed either module_parameter or dropping the binding entirely as possible inbetween options. -- Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
