[PATCH v4 1/3] dt-bindings: dma: arm-dma350: document generic and combined IRQ topologies

[Jun Guo]

On 3/23/2026 8:00 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL
> 
> On 23/03/2026 12:48, Jun Guo wrote:
>> Update the DMA-350 DT binding to match the current driver behavior.
>>
>> Allow both:
>> - "arm,dma-350" as the generic compatible, and
>> - "cix,sky1-dma-350", "arm,dma-350" for SoC-specific fallback usage.
>>
>> Also document interrupt topology variants supported by hardware
>> integration:
>> - one combined interrupt for all channels, or
>> - one interrupt per channel (up to 8 channels).
>>
>> Assisted-by: Cursor: GPT-5.3-Codex
> 
> There is no space here. Read the docs, I quite insisted on this last
> time. If you make mistakes in this, I doubt you read the docs thus I
> doubt you followed the requirements - have actual rights to send it for
> example.
Sorry, I did overlook the format between AGENT_NAME and MODEL_VERSION. I 
will fix it.
> 
>> Signed-off-by: Jun Guo <jun.guo at cixtech.com>
>> ---
>>   .../devicetree/bindings/dma/arm,dma-350.yaml  | 34 +++++++++++++------
>>   1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/arm,dma-350.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/arm,dma-350.yaml
>> index 429f682f15d8..47091614d1b4 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/arm,dma-350.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/arm,dma-350.yaml
>> @@ -14,7 +14,14 @@ allOf:
>>
>>   properties:
>>     compatible:
>> -    const: arm,dma-350
>> +    description:
>> +      Use "arm,dma-350" for generic integration. A SoC-specific
>> +      compatible may be listed first, followed by "arm,dma-350".
> 
> What is the point of explaining it? What is the difference between
> generic integration and non-generic?
I might not need to add the "cix,sky1-dma-350" and can directly use 
"arm,dma-350" instead. I will rework the code and description accordingly.

Best regards,
Jun