On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 08:12:12AM +0100, Xiubo Li wrote:
The 'big-endian-data' property is originally used to indicate whether the LSB firstly or MSB firstly will be transmitted to the CODEC or received from the CODEC, and there has nothing relation to the memory data.
Generally, if the audio data in big endian format, which will be using the bytes reversion, Here this can only be used to bits reversion.
So using the 'lsb-first' instead of 'big-endian-data' can make the code to be readable easier and more easy to understand what this property is used to do.
This property used for configuring whether the LSB or the MSB is transmitted first for the fifo data.
Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li Li.Xiubo@freescale.com Cc: Nicolin Chen nicoleotsuka@gmail.com
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/fsl-sai.txt | 8 ++++---- sound/soc/fsl/fsl_sai.c | 6 +++--- sound/soc/fsl/fsl_sai.h | 2 +- 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/fsl-sai.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/fsl-sai.txt index 06a405e..4956b14 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/fsl-sai.txt +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/fsl-sai.txt @@ -20,9 +20,9 @@ Required properties: See ../pinctrl/pinctrl-bindings.txt for details of the property values.
- big-endian: Boolean property, required if all the FTM_PWM registers are big-endian rather than little-endian.
-- big-endian-data: If this property is absent, the little endian mode will
- be in use as default, or the big endian mode will be in use for all the
- fifo data.
+- lsb-first: Configures whether the LSB or the MSB is transmitted first for
- the fifo data. If this property is absent, the MSB is transmitted first as
- default, or the LSB is transmitted first.
Both Nicolin [1] and Mark [2] asked for the old property to be kept around for compatibility reasons. Those requests seem to have been ignored entirely; the commit message doesn't even describe why you believe removing support for the old property is safe.
So NAK unless this patch is updated to either:
- Keep support for the old property, but mark it as deprecated in the documentation (having a warning if said property is used is also fine).
- Describe why it is safe to remove the property outright, and both Mark and Nicolin agree that this is fine.
The former is the preferred way of doing things, and the latter should be the exceptional case. We don't even save much here my dropping support for the old property.
I have no proeprty with addition of the the new property; the rationale for the new naming makes sense to me.
Thanks, Mark.
[1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140827070544.GO17528@sirena.org.uk [2] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/CAGoOwPSTJaT0UA4yaYR0x49C8UHbmKAR8PzUfV9ZWVW5XBfV5w...