Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] ASoC: Allow the DAPM routes to be stored in device tree

[Stephen Warren <swarren-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>]

On 12/10/2011 05:49 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 01:52:00PM -0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
> 
>> I'd originally made this property specific to the Tegra+WM8903 machine
>> driver, and you'd asked me to make it generic. Is there room to use
>> the binding above for the Tegra+WM8903 machine driver only, in order
>> to get the driver converted to DT, then define/implement something
>> completely generic to replace it, i.e. the stuff below?
> 
> I was asking for the code to be generic, not the binding itself.  If the 
> code could for example take a property name as an argument that'd allow 
> other bindings to use the same code without having to have a generic 
> binding which has bits which depend strongly on some Linux specific
> machine driver.

Ah right, I misunderstood then.

So, does the following sound reasonable:

Add:

snd_soc_of_parse_card_name(struct snd_soc_card *card,
			   const char *prop);

.. and have the machine driver call that whenever it decides, rather
than having e.g. snd_soc_register_card() call it.

Add:

int snd_soc_of_parse_audio_routing(struct snd_soc_card *card,
				   const char *prop);

.. and have the machine driver call that whenever it decides, rather
than having e.g. snd_soc_register_card() call it.

Remove
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/embedded-audio-complex.txt from
the patches completely, and document the properties solely in the
Tegra+WM8903 machine driver binding; we can write
embedded-audio-complex.txt if we create a truly generic ASoC driver binding.

Does that sound reasonable?

Thanks.

-- 
nvpublic