On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 05:47:18 +0000 Naga Sureshkumar Relli <nagas...@xilinx.com> wrote:
> > > +Required properties: > > > +- compatible: Should be "xlnx,zynqmp-nand" or > > > "arasan,nfc-v3p10" > > > > In your example it's not an "or" since both are defined. > In our previous discussion (https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/748901/) > We decided to have compatible strings like " compatible = > "<soc-vendor>,<ip-revision>", "arasan,<ip-revision>";" > So it should be either of these. > so I will write something like below > "Possible values are "xlnx,zynqmp-nand" > "arasan,nfc-v3p10" > And in example I will mention any one compatible. > Is it ok? Hm, why do you need arasan,nfc-v3p10 at all if it's supposed to be overloaded by a soc specific compat? > > > + > > > +Optional properties: > > > +- arasan,has-mdma: Enables DMA support > > > > Can't you detect that based on the compatible (or thanks to a register). If > > it's something you > > choose when configuring the IP and can't detect at runtime I guess it's > > fine. > There is no way to select DMA when configuring the IP. > But it has internal DMA and there is a register to select PIO or DMA while > starting a transfer. > So if user really don't want DMA, then we will never set DMA in the code > based on DT property. If it's a purely SW choice, then is shouldn't be described in the DT. You can use a module param, but I'm not even sure why one would want to disable DMA.
