On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 05:02:46PM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote: > IMHO this SoC-based identification looks much better, especially considering > the fact that IP version isn't something easily determinable, as even the > documentation can sometimes be not really clear about that. Yeah, it's not terribly clever either way. We've been using the version numbers in audio for a long time partly because it is documented sometimes and partly because most of the SoCs tend to have one fully featured controller and a bunch of secondary controllers on older IP revisions. > However the s3c6410-i2sv4 string looks a bit unfortunate. AFAIK there were > two types of I2S IPs on S3C6410 - normal I2S and I2S multichannel. What > about having a compatible like s3c6410-i2s-multi? It was explicitly identified as I2Sv4 in the S3C6410 datasheet so no real issue there.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
