From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E479C433E0 for ; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 11:51:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from alsa0.perex.cz (alsa0.perex.cz [77.48.224.243]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B0CC8208A9 for ; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 11:51:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=alsa-project.org header.i=@alsa-project.org header.b="c8vbUvYo"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="n8BSTkCW" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B0CC8208A9 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (alsa1.perex.cz [207.180.221.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3ED761660; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 13:50:55 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa0.perex.cz 3ED761660 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=alsa-project.org; s=default; t=1596541905; bh=erKjDfsyWHFse4lDcnfJJfQ34faBG+4muG9hErhPl5A=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Cc:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From; b=c8vbUvYoV6YjkfIpqA5H9aCD1WxwTwJMaq1GPCqko6vM2Zg/3oVPH1sUAlcxdVnQJ bTSUfpBb++ENTu5hPM3P8eJ2JU6WsuzNeOIx5MmyrAYRLkl1PMJNI/FAp7Z3GjCV0h Gdj7qGGregCnOzZNUPQLESX1hIrIbKGJyKF5bdcg= Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id E08C4F8014C; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 13:50:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix, from userid 50401) id 28DC3F80150; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 13:50:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 29C2EF800B7 for ; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 13:50:42 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa1.perex.cz 29C2EF800B7 Authentication-Results: alsa1.perex.cz; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="n8BSTkCW" Received: from localhost (fw-tnat.cambridge.arm.com [217.140.96.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AF07E2086A; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 11:50:40 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1596541841; bh=erKjDfsyWHFse4lDcnfJJfQ34faBG+4muG9hErhPl5A=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=n8BSTkCWnzkGly3EX+k5/5Mdj3y4c15PE3Zvz63K4IP8PLULgbDwSpWxMhXN/H5wg neqdQjCanKrZyK+pPMh4AFiVZlX30KSlJWVHbj2FS+MshPIKsMCvP27PwR/uXFQtZw 4q2aorUsta7l5JnGV081BNbgUq5KP+mWh5I8Ajjk= Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 12:50:19 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: "Sit, Michael Wei Hong" Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] dt-bindings: sound: intel,keembay-i2s: Add channel-max property Message-ID: <20200804115019.GA5249@sirena.org.uk> References: <20200730055319.1522-1-michael.wei.hong.sit@intel.com> <20200730055319.1522-5-michael.wei.hong.sit@intel.com> <20200730112948.GB5055@sirena.org.uk> <20200803104917.GB4502@sirena.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="qMm9M+Fa2AknHoGS" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Cookie: Every solution breeds new problems. User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Cc: "pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com" , "Rojewski, Cezary" , "Shevchenko, Andriy" , "alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" , "Sia, Jee Heng" , "tiwai@suse.com" , "liam.r.girdwood@linux.intel.com" X-BeenThere: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Alsa-devel mailing list for ALSA developers - http://www.alsa-project.org" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: "Alsa-devel" --qMm9M+Fa2AknHoGS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 01:57:23AM +0000, Sit, Michael Wei Hong wrote: > > > The platform also has 2 different interfaces which have different > > supported max-channels. > > > Using this value in the device-tree to determine the maximum > > supported channel of the interface. > > These should have different compatible strings, there are likely > > further differences between them (even if they are not currently > > documented). > The 2 different I2S ports are from the same SoC which supports different > number of channels, do we need different compatible strings for this? > Considering the only difference is the maximum supported channels is 8 and 2? Are you *sure* that's the only difference, or is that just the only difference you know about right now? --qMm9M+Fa2AknHoGS Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEreZoqmdXGLWf4p/qJNaLcl1Uh9AFAl8pS3gACgkQJNaLcl1U h9A+rwf8D5WYj5TvTjpmdksdW5qpD5mSbP+JWLV42nXt+JtdG/0YDBwiflNwZQRy 3fEMl2SzsmmI+/79vwQNXozVR/YT6qu41v4d6h8JRdZUcjkqv3Emxsasl+dX7d2/ HpIY3vhnmGhfbzW9U1h7w1YFVPvZsb1q9QhQKxXPrkHiCtAlvF5GMGYMFEBdvacI N6vImZCSLgDfeerEr3mRrlfyjCENeVY5P+fBZNMUoWIpDLnnD/+n/9op5NDh82ZE bmS1K1REsZbrsFzwcUxx99eT2kfHVr85TY9167IkYEkTu7GAkliNVYW5UUsuAlIW 136mzQPprRhnlqfNWz37qx2ECis3ug== =sxCb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --qMm9M+Fa2AknHoGS--