Kumar Gala wrote:
>> 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.
I still think we need something. Otherwise, people are going to be confused.
I know I would. I'd be searching the RM for the string "ELO" and wonder why
it wasn't there.
>>> + Example:
>>> + [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
>>
>> Shouldn't this be [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> its an example that has not basis is reality :)
Eh?
>> 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.
There isn't one. Why should the driver assume that reg/80 == channel #?
Besides, I still can't differentiate between DMA controller 0 and DMA
controller 1 that way. No, we need a device-id.
--
Timur Tabi
Linux Kernel Developer @ Freescale
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
