On Nov 21, 2007, at 8:59 AM, Timur Tabi wrote:
> Kumar Gala wrote:
>
>> + * Freescale 83xx DMA Controller
>> +
>> + Freescale PowerPC 83xx have on chip general purpose DMA
>> controllers.
>> +
>> + Required properties:
>> +
>> + - compatible : compatible list, contains 2 entries,
>> first is
>> + "fsl,CHIP-dma", where CHIP is the processor
>> + (mpc8349, mpc8360, etc.) and the second is
>> + "fsl,elo-dma"
>
> Shouldn't we put some text somewhere that we're calling it the Elo
> controller even though that word isn't used in the reference manual?
we don't really have a place to put that. its effectively documented
right here.
>
>
>> + * Freescale 85xx DMA Controller
>
> And 86xx.
yes, true.
>> +
>> + Freescale PowerPC 85xx have on chip general purpose DMA
>> controllers.
>> +
>> + Required properties:
>> +
>> + - compatible : compatible list, contains 2 entries,
>> first is
>> + "fsl,CHIP-dma", where CHIP is the processor
>> + (mpc8540, mpc8540, etc.) and the second is
>> + "fsl,eloplus-dma"
>> + - reg : <registers mapping for DMA general
>> status reg>
>> + - ranges : Should be defined as specified in 1) to
>> describe
>> the
>> + DMA controller channels.
>> +
>> + - DMA channel nodes:
>> + - compatible : compatible list, contains 2 entries,
>> first is
>> + "fsl,CHIP-dma-channel", where CHIP is the
>> processor
>> + (mpc8540, mpc8560, etc.) and the second is
>> + "fsl,eloplus-dma-channel"
>> + - reg : <registers mapping for channel>
>> + - interrupts : <interrupt mapping for DMA channel IRQ>
>> + - interrupt-parent : optional, if needed for interrupt mapping
>> +
>> + Example:
>> + [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
>
> Shouldn't this be [EMAIL PROTECTED]
its an example that has not basis is reality :)
>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>> + #size-cells = <1>;
>> + compatible = "fsl,mpc8540-dma", "fsl,eloplus-dma";
>> + reg = <21300 4>;
>> + ranges = <0 21100 200>;
>> + [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
>> + compatible = "fsl,mpc8540-dma-channel",
>> "fsl,eloplus-dma-
>> channel";
>> + reg = <0 80>;
>> + interrupt-parent = <&mpic>;
>> + interrupts = <14 2>;
>> + };
>
> The DMA controller and the DMA channels need a "device-id", so that
> they can be identified by number. Some peripherals, like the SSI,
> can only use the controller and channel number. This is what I have
> in my 8610 DTS:
Why not use reg for this? I don't see any reason to add another
"unique id" when there is already one.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
> #address-cells = <1>;
> #size-cells = <1>;
> compatible = "fsl,mpc8610-dma", "fsl,mpc8540-
> dma";
> --> device-id = <0>;
> reg = <21300 4>; /* DMA general status
> register */
> ranges = <0 21100 200>;
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
> compatible = "fsl,mpc8610-dma-channel",
> "fsl,mpc8540-dma-channel";
> --> device-id = <0>;
> reg = <0 80>;
> interrupt-parent = <&mpic>;
> interrupts = <14 2>;
> };
>
- k
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
