Hi,

On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Padma Venkat padma.kvr@gmail.com wrote:

Hi,

On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 12:32 AM, Kukjin Kim kgene.kim@samsung.com wrote:

...

Padma Venkat wrote:

...

Hi,

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 10:39 PM, Mark Brown broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com wrote:

...

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 01:24:14PM +0000, Grant Likely wrote:

...

On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 16:12:53 +0530, Padmavathi Venna

padma.v@samsung.com wrote:

...

...

...

+- compatible : "samsung,samsung-i2s"

...

Isn't that kind of redundant? :-)

...

The format of the compatible strings should be "<vendor>,<part-

number>-i2s".

...

...

Please be specific about the part number that you're doing the binding for. For example; use "samsung,exynos4210-i2s" instead of

"samsung,exynos-i2s".

...

There are actually versioned IPs here (where the versions are used publically in a few places) but it's not clearly documented which is which. It would be reasonable to use the IP versions here I think.

Samsung has three i2s drivers one for s3c24xx, one for s3c2412 and one for rest of the platforms. The above mentioned other platforms has Version 3/4/5 of i2s controllers. This dt binding is for for the i2s

Where is the version defined such as 3, 4, 5? So, what is the "sound/soc/Samsung/s3c-i2s-v2.[ch]"?

Versions 3, 4, 5 are defined in dev-audio.c file of corresponding platforms. s3c-i2s-v2 is used in s3c2412 platform.

...

...

driver that has support for Version 3/4/5 of i2s controller. So "samsung,i2s-v5" is okay as compatible name? Please suggest me.

I agree with using version here but we need some consensus about that.

Any suggestions on i2s compatible name or "samsung,i2s-v5" is okay?

...

• Kukjin

-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Thanks Padma

Thanks Padma