From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] powerpc: add platform registration for ALSA SoC drivers Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 10:16:30 +0100 Message-ID: <20100428091629.GA31400@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1272314980-23679-1-git-send-email-timur@freescale.com> <1272350168.24542.6.camel@pasglop> <1272355624.3204.52.camel@odin> <20100427222913.GE15083@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from opensource2.wolfsonmicro.com (opensource.wolfsonmicro.com [80.75.67.52]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9199524487 for ; Wed, 28 Apr 2010 11:16:22 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, Benjamin Herrenschmidt , kumar.gala@freescale.com, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Timur Tabi , Liam Girdwood List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 08:31:18PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote: > On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 4:29 PM, Mark Brown > > On the other hand from a pragmatic point of view it's just much less > > hassle to just only provide the mechanism for instantiating a machine > > with custom code and use that for everything. > Also true, but this approach carries with it an incremental cost that > distributions feel the pain of. Ultimately I think we'll find a sweet > spot somewhere in between. Meh, it's not really much hassle for the distributions - it's all handled by the kernel, they don't need to explicitly do anything. None of the machine-specific stuff has ever been a hassle getting stuff merged, problems have always been in the drivers for the devices which device tree isn't going to make a blind bit of difference to (other than the usual discussions about what exactly the device tree should look like).