* Kuninori Morimoto <[email protected]> [181211 23:16]: > > Hi Tony > > > The issue I have with that it does not then follow the binding doc :) > > > > See this part in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/graph.txt: > > > > "If a single port is connected to more than one remote device, an > > 'endpoint' child node must be provided for each link." > > > > Isn't the I2C TDM case the same as "single port connecected to > > more than one remote device" rather than multiple ports? > > > > To me it seems we're currently only handling the multiple ports > > case, and not multiple endpoints for a port. Other than fixing > > that, things should work just as earlier with my two patches. > > That is unless I accidentally broke something. > > > > So just trying to correct the binding usage. Or am I missing > > something? > > I'm not 100% sure your "I2C TDM case", but you can check > multi-endpoint sample on "Example: Multi DAI with DPCM" below. > "pcm3168a" is using multi-endpoint. > Does this help you ? > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10712877/
Hmm, so do you have multiple separate ports at the "&sound" node hardware? If so then yeah multiple ports make sense. But if you only a single physical (I2S?) port at the "&sound" node hardware, then IMO you should only have one port and multiple endpoints there according to the graph.txt binding doc. In my McBSP case there is only a single physical I2S port that can be TDM split into timeslots. Regards, Tony
