On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 09:53:44AM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote: > Hi Conor, > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 6:14 AM Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Dumb question maybe, but it is not mentioned here - they are actually > > compatible devices, right? I see that they have some different match > > data in the driver (relating to some DMA erratum on the 23 seemingly), > > so it's not immediately obvious to me. > > That's correct. > > imx23 and imx28 are SoCs from the same family (mxs) and they share the > same AUART block, so the same programming model. Right. I wasn't sure if the erratum workaround would also work on the 28, but sounds like it does. > imx23 is the first member of this family. It had an AUART erratum. > imx28 is the second member of this family and had this erratum fixed. > > This means that using: > > compatible = "fsl,imx28-auart", "fsl,imx23-auart"; > > is valid. > > Would you like me to improve the commit log with the information above? Your call. Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Thanks, Conor.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
