Hi Mark,
Thank you for the commenst. I'll Fix them in v8.
Here are some remaining question:
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:18:09AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
+Required properties:
- compatible : Compatible list, contains "fsl,<chip>-spdif".
What are valid values for <chip>? The binding should mention this. There are bindings that don't, but they need to be fixed. Undocumented ABIs are a bad idea.
I see, so 'Compatible list, must contains "fsl,imx35-spdif"' would be okay?
- interrupts : Contains spdif interrupt.
Is that the only interrupt the device generates?
Yes, how could I improve this description?
"core" The core clock of spdif controller"rxtx<0-7>" Clock source list for tx and rx clock.This clock list should be identical tothe source list connecting to the spdifclock mux in "SPDIF Transceiver ClockDiagram" of SoC reference manual. Itcan also be referred to TxClk_Sourcebit of register SPDIF_STC.Could you elaborate on the last sentence? I'm not sure exactly what you meant.
The list is also identical to the TxClk_Source bit value list of register SPDIF_STC.
+Example:
+spdif: spdif@02004000 {
compatible = "fsl,imx6q-spdif","fsl,imx35-spdif";Is "fsl,imx35-spdif" necessary in the list, or is it not the case all "fsl,<chip>-spdif" variants are compatible with it?
That should be mentioned along with the list of valid compatible strings.
I guess it's better to drop the 'imx6q-spdif' here?
Thank you, Nicolin