[PATCH] ASoC: tda998x: Fix lack of required reg in DT documentation

2014-03-20 Thread Jean-Francois Moine
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 15:19:34 + Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > I'm not saying that it has to match the physical device fitted - I'm > merely suggesting not using nxp,tda1998x which could (and as Sebastian > has found, does) conflict with other devices with different properties. > > We stil

[PATCH] ASoC: tda998x: Fix lack of required reg in DT documentation

2014-03-20 Thread Russell King - ARM Linux
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 04:54:40PM +0100, Jean-Francois Moine wrote: > On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 15:19:34 + > Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > I'm not saying that it has to match the physical device fitted - I'm > > merely suggesting not using nxp,tda1998x which could (and as Sebastian > > has

[PATCH] ASoC: tda998x: Fix lack of required reg in DT documentation

2014-03-20 Thread Jean-Francois Moine
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 14:31:10 + Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > 1. change the DT compatible strings the driver has to accept both >nxp,tda19988 and nxp,tda19989, and set the appropriate device >in the DT file (tda19988). I'm a bit nervous about using >"nxp,tda1998x" in case we'r

[PATCH] ASoC: tda998x: Fix lack of required reg in DT documentation

2014-03-20 Thread Sebastian Hesselbarth
On 03/20/2014 02:52 PM, Jean-Francois Moine wrote: > On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 14:32:18 +0100 > Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > >> Ok, I had another round of google'ing and found this: >> http://hipstercircuits.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/TDA19988.pdf >> >> There, the datasheet specifically for TDA199

[PATCH] ASoC: tda998x: Fix lack of required reg in DT documentation

2014-03-20 Thread Russell King - ARM Linux
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 03:59:35PM +0100, Jean-Francois Moine wrote: > On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 14:31:10 + > Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > 1. change the DT compatible strings the driver has to accept both > >nxp,tda19988 and nxp,tda19989, and set the appropriate device > >in the DT

[PATCH] ASoC: tda998x: Fix lack of required reg in DT documentation

2014-03-20 Thread Jean-Francois Moine
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 14:32:18 +0100 Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > Ok, I had another round of google'ing and found this: > http://hipstercircuits.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/TDA19988.pdf > > There, the datasheet specifically for TDA19988 only states 0x70 and > 0x34 as the two i2c addresses. Th

[PATCH] ASoC: tda998x: Fix lack of required reg in DT documentation

2014-03-20 Thread Sebastian Hesselbarth
On 03/20/2014 02:01 PM, Jean-Francois Moine wrote: > On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 13:32:24 +0100 > Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > >>> + - reg: I2C address - must be <0x70> >> >> TDA9983b datasheet says: >> >> "Bits A0 and A1 of the I2C-bus device address are externally selected >> by pins A0 and A1." >> >

[PATCH] ASoC: tda998x: Fix lack of required reg in DT documentation

2014-03-20 Thread Russell King - ARM Linux
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 02:52:21PM +0100, Jean-Francois Moine wrote: > Thanks for the link. > > OK, then, as the linux tda998x driver handles only the tda 19988 and > 19989 chips, the HDMI I2C address is always 0x70. > > So, question: Russell and Sebastian, do you still want an other patch? > >

[PATCH] ASoC: tda998x: Fix lack of required reg in DT documentation

2014-03-20 Thread Jean-Francois Moine
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 14:01:56 +0100 Jean-Francois Moine wrote: > For other boards using the TDA998x family, if the I2C address is > different from 0x70, have you an idea about what can be the CEC I2C > address? (this value is actually hard-coded in the TDA998x driver) I had a look again on the td

[PATCH] ASoC: tda998x: Fix lack of required reg in DT documentation

2014-03-20 Thread Jean-Francois Moine
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 13:32:24 +0100 Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > > + - reg: I2C address - must be <0x70> > > TDA9983b datasheet says: > > "Bits A0 and A1 of the I2C-bus device address are externally selected > by pins A0 and A1." > > Therefore, 0x70, 0x71, 0x72, and 0x73 are valid i2c addr

[PATCH] ASoC: tda998x: Fix lack of required reg in DT documentation

2014-03-20 Thread Sebastian Hesselbarth
On 03/20/2014 09:58 AM, Jean-Francois Moine wrote: > The I2C address (reg) is required for the TDA998x driver to be loaded > and initialized. > > Signed-off-by: Jean-Francois Moine > --- > This patch applies to linux-next. > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/drm/i2c/tda998x.txt | 2 ++ >

[PATCH] ASoC: tda998x: Fix lack of required reg in DT documentation

2014-03-20 Thread Russell King - ARM Linux
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 02:01:56PM +0100, Jean-Francois Moine wrote: > On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 13:32:24 +0100 > Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > > > > + - reg: I2C address - must be <0x70> > > > > TDA9983b datasheet says: > > > > "Bits A0 and A1 of the I2C-bus device address are externally selecte

[PATCH] ASoC: tda998x: Fix lack of required reg in DT documentation

2014-03-20 Thread Russell King - ARM Linux
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 01:32:24PM +0100, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > On 03/20/2014 09:58 AM, Jean-Francois Moine wrote: >> The I2C address (reg) is required for the TDA998x driver to be loaded >> and initialized. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jean-Francois Moine >> --- >> This patch applies to linux-ne

[PATCH] ASoC: tda998x: Fix lack of required reg in DT documentation

2014-03-20 Thread Robert Nelson
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Jean-Francois Moine wrote: > On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 14:31:10 + > Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > >> 1. change the DT compatible strings the driver has to accept both >>nxp,tda19988 and nxp,tda19989, and set the appropriate device >>in the DT file (tda19

[PATCH] ASoC: tda998x: Fix lack of required reg in DT documentation

2014-03-20 Thread Jean-Francois Moine
The I2C address (reg) is required for the TDA998x driver to be loaded and initialized. Signed-off-by: Jean-Francois Moine --- This patch applies to linux-next. --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/drm/i2c/tda998x.txt | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree