From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Jander Subject: Re: ASoC audio fabric OF bindings RFC. was: Re: ASoC MPC5xxx PSC AC97 audio driver Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 08:31:38 +0200 Message-ID: <20110913083138.2e0661de@archvile> References: <20110908184441.GD16989@siel.b> <20110909082844.3dbf0e72@archvile> <20110909120216.263eeb54@archvile> <20110909163714.GA4302@sirena.org.uk> <20110912083158.29d9e1fe@archvile> <20110912110950.GD2953@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20110912145507.4ac0d56f@archvile> <20110912131924.GB5887@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20110912155905.35cda85b@archvile> <20110912145214.GC5887@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20110912194850.GC23345@ponder.secretlab.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110912194850.GC23345@ponder.secretlab.ca> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: Grant Likely Cc: lrg@ti.com, alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, Mark Brown , devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, torbenh List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 13:48:50 -0600 Grant Likely wrote: > On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 03:52:14PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 03:59:05PM +0200, David Jander wrote: > > > Mark Brown wrote: > > > > > > Note the "dynamic" bit - the configuration changes at runtime. > > > > Describing the hardware for something like a modern smartphone isn't > > > > particularly useful due to the flexibility, there are too many > > > > different ways of configuring the system and we need code to acutally > > > > take those decision. > > > > > Ok, but you could still describe the hardwired part of it (Audio muxes, > > > codecs, busses and physical interfaces). Isn't that what OF is all about? > > > In our case, its just a simple AC97 codec connected to a simple AC97 bus. > > > Sounds like total overkill having to write a "fabric driver" for this.... > > > while there are already quite a few that are all 99% the same! > > > > I'm not sure I understand what you are talking about. As I've already > > said at least once having a *machine* driver which covers multiple > > machines is absolutely OK. We already have several such drivers in > > kernel. > > Yes, a machine driver is quite a sane way to manage the huge range of > variability of a machine's audio complex. If it turns out that an SoC > only ever has one machine driver that handles all possible > configurations, it still isn't really more complex. If, however, the > permutations are sufficiently different to warrant separate driver > then the groundwork is already established to support it sanely. > > BTW, this isn't a question about "what OF is all about". It makes > perfect sense in the OF context to have a node describing how multiple > devices are aggregated into a single logically composite device. > > Do a machine driver. It's the right thing to do. Ok, thanks. Best regards, -- David Jander Protonic Holland.