Am Sonntag, den 27.01.2019, 23:08 -0700 schrieb Angus Ainslie (Purism): > This is identical to the imx7d.
So it can be dropped and the i.MX8M DT should just specify the "fsl,imx7d-sdma" as a fallback compatible for the SDMA codes. If both the imx8m and imx7d compatible are present in the DT, we can introduce a more specific matchic when we actually need it. No need to pollute the code with this from the start. Regards, Lucas > Signed-off-by: Angus Ainslie (Purism) <[email protected]> > --- > drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c | 4 ++++ > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c b/drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c > index 757fad2fbfae..c4db4fe6bcc9 100644 > --- a/drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c > +++ b/drivers/dma/imx-sdma.c > @@ -578,6 +578,9 @@ static const struct platform_device_id > sdma_devtypes[] = { > }, { > .name = "imx7d-sdma", > .driver_data = (unsigned long)&sdma_imx7d, > + }, { > + .name = "imx8mq-sdma", > + .driver_data = (unsigned long)&sdma_imx7d, > }, { > /* sentinel */ > } > @@ -592,6 +595,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id sdma_dt_ids[] = > { > { .compatible = "fsl,imx31-sdma", .data = &sdma_imx31, }, > { .compatible = "fsl,imx25-sdma", .data = &sdma_imx25, }, > { .compatible = "fsl,imx7d-sdma", .data = &sdma_imx7d, }, > + { .compatible = "fsl,imx8mq-sdma", .data = &sdma_imx7d, }, > { /* sentinel */ } > }; > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, sdma_dt_ids);
