Hi, On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 10:39 PM, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 01:24:14PM +0000, Grant Likely wrote: >> On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 16:12:53 +0530, Padmavathi Venna <padma.v@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > +- compatible : "samsung,samsung-i2s" > >> Isn't that kind of redundant? :-) > >> The format of the compatible strings should be "<vendor>,<part-number>-i2s". >> Please be specific about the part number that you're doing the binding >> for. For example; use "samsung,exynos4210-i2s" instead of "samsung,exynos-i2s". > > There are actually versioned IPs here (where the versions are used > publically in a few places) but it's not clearly documented which is > which. It would be reasonable to use the IP versions here I think. Samsung has three i2s drivers one for s3c24xx, one for s3c2412 and one for rest of the platforms. The above mentioned other platforms has Version 3/4/5 of i2s controllers. This dt binding is for for the i2s driver that has support for Version 3/4/5 of i2s controller. So "samsung,i2s-v5" is okay as compatible name? Please suggest me. Thanks Padma -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |