From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [RFC 04/16] ASoC: multi-component - TI CODECs Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 20:02:05 +0100 Message-ID: <20100701190205.GA30430@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> References: <1277488383-31287-1-git-send-email-lrg@slimlogic.co.uk> <1277488383-31287-5-git-send-email-lrg@slimlogic.co.uk> 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 7287124431 for ; Thu, 1 Jul 2010 21:02:06 +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: peter.ujfalusi@nokia.com Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, lrg@slimlogic.co.uk List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 02:08:11PM +0200, peter.ujfalusi@nokia.com wrote: > - What is the reason to move the IRQ, GPIO, and regulator request from the i2c_probe to soc_probe? So, the theory here is that when you've got both I2C and SPI on a single CODEC all the basic setup code tends to be identical over all buses (as it is with the current register() functions. Personally I do find this a bit strange since it feels better to have the driver check for all the things it needs before it has the subsystem go and try to do broader setup work but it does do the code sharing job.