On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 09:38:55PM +0200, Belisko Marek wrote:

> > Is there any burning reason for adding the linux,bt-sco compatible?

> No no real reason just want to keep that if somebody would like use it from DT
> referenced by bt-sco entry (similar as platform data). I'm adding DT
> support for it because I want to use
> this for W2CBW003 chip and I can use simply "linux,bt-sco" property in
> DT or I instead of that add new vendor
> prefix + add new compatible entry which is IMO much harder that
> reference it by generic name.

OK, can you change the patch to just have the part specific name please?
If we were to have a generic binding it should really be richer than
this, for example I think I've seen BT devices that take in 16kHz
streams rather than 8kHz and there are often requirements for oversized
data frames as well.