On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 12:05:02PM +0900, jiada wrote: > Hi Geert > > > On 2019/02/20 17:10, Kuninori Morimoto wrote: > > > > Hi Geert > > > > > > According to user reference manual for R-CAR H3 and M3-W SoCs, > > > > in order to access busif4 ~ busif7, extended audio dmac registers > > > > (PDMASAREn, PDMADAREn, PDMACHCREn) > > > > need to be used, rather than basic audio dmac registers > > > > (PDMASARn, PDMADARn, PDMACHCRn) > > > > > > > > This patch set updates H3 (= r8a7795) and M3-W (= r8a7796) > > > > to use extended audio dmac registers > > > > > > The same change should be applied for M3-N and RZ/G2M, right? > > > > Currently only H3 and M3-W support to use busif other than busif0, > I feel currently it's only necessary to use extended audio dmac register for > these SoCs > > > > R-Car E3 and RZ/G2E already use the extended register set, as they do not > > > have the basic set. > > > > > > For SoCs having both, this feels a bit like describing software policy, instead > > > of hardware, to me. Would it make sense to extend the audio bindings, and > > > allow describing both the basic and extended register sets, and let the driver > > > make the decision which one to use? > > > > I don't think we need to use basic register. > > This means extended register only is very enough. > > I'm not sure why datasheet is indicating basic... > > > Extended audio dmac registers covers all function of basic ones, > so there is no need to use basic registers This still sounds a lot like a policy decision that should be made by the driver based on a fuller description of the hardware in DT.
