Re: [PATCH 2/9] dt-bindings: ASoC: Add chv3-i2s

From: Krzysztof Kozlowski
Date: Wed Apr 26 2023 - 09:15:44 EST


On 25/04/2023 18:01, Paweł Anikiel wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 7:00 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski
> <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On 14/04/2023 16:01, Paweł Anikiel wrote:
>>> Add binding for chv3-i2s device.
>>
>> Your subject needs improvements:
>> 1. ASoC goes before bindings
>> 2. You miss some meaningful title of device. "chv3-i2s" can be anything,
>> so add Google or Google Chameleon. Or use entire compatible.
>
> Would "ASoC: dt-bindings: Add Google Chameleon v3 I2S device" be better?

Yes, thanks.

>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Paweł Anikiel <pan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> .../bindings/sound/google,chv3-i2s.yaml | 42 +++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+)
>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/google,chv3-i2s.yaml
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/google,chv3-i2s.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/google,chv3-i2s.yaml
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 000000000000..6f49cf059ac5
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/google,chv3-i2s.yaml
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
>>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
>>> +%YAML 1.2
>>> +---
>>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/sound/google,chv3-i2s.yaml#
>>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
>>> +
>>> +title: Google Chameleon v3 I2S device
>>> +
>>> +maintainers:
>>> + - Paweł Anikiel <pan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> +
>>> +description: |
>>> + I2S device for the Google Chameleon v3. The device handles both RX
>>> + and TX using a producer/consumer ring buffer design.
>>> +
>>> +properties:
>>> + compatible:
>>> + const: google,chv3-i2s
>>
>> Missing blank line.
>>
>> Is chv3 the name of your SoC? Where are the SoC bindings? What's exactly
>> the versioning scheme for it (compatibles must be specific, not generic).
>
> The Chameleon v3 is based around an Intel Arria 10 SoC FPGA. The i2s
> device is implemented inside the FPGA. Does this case require SoC
> bindings?

No, I was mistaken. I somehow get impression that's for Pixel... Sorry
for the noise.

>
>>
>>> + reg:
>>> + items:
>>> + - description: core registers
>>> + - description: irq registers
>>
>> As well...
>>
>>> + interrupts:
>>> + maxItems: 1
>>> +
>>> +required:
>>> + - compatible
>>> + - reg
>>> + - interrupts
>>> +
>>> +additionalProperties: false
>>> +
>>> +examples:
>>> + - |
>>> + #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h>
>>> +
>>> + i2s0: i2s@c0060300 {
>>> + compatible = "google,chv3-i2s";
>>> + reg = <0xc0060300 0x100>,
>>> + <0xc0060f00 0x10>;
>>> + interrupts = <0 20 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>>
>> Isn't 0 also a known define?
>
> Do you mean this?
> interrupts = <GIC_SPI 20 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;


Yes, please.

Best regards,
Krzysztof