From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lars-Peter Clausen Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH] ASoC: generic: add generic compound card with DT support Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2014 21:11:23 +0100 Message-ID: <52C4766B.8080000@metafoo.de> References: <20131231113138.102044cf@armhf> <52C466E1.3030302@metafoo.de> <20140101210814.31e3f3a9@armhf> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20140101210814.31e3f3a9@armhf> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jean-Francois Moine Cc: Liam Girdwood , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, Mark Brown , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On 01/01/2014 09:08 PM, Jean-Francois Moine wrote: > On Wed, 01 Jan 2014 20:05:05 +0100 > Lars-Peter Clausen wrote: > >> As Mark also said, this binding definitely leaks way too much internals of >> the current ASoC implementation. In my opinion the way forward for ASoC is >> to stop to distinguish between different types of components. This is on one >> hand CODECS and CPU-DAIs and on the other hand also front-end and beck-end >> DAIs. The first steps in this direction have already been take by the start >> of the component-fication, but its still a long way to go. Exposing those >> concepts via the devicetree will only make it harder to get rid of them >> later. The bindings for a compound card should essentially describe which >> components are involved and how the fabric between and around them looks >> like. If the type of the component is needed in the ASoC implementation it >> should be possible to auto-discover it. Also I think we want to align the >> devicetree bindings with what the media people have been doing[1]. > > (you forgot the [1] reference) http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/video-interfaces.txt