From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: Add MAX98089 CODEC driver Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 21:18:02 +0000 Message-ID: <20101111211801.GA3399@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <4CDC5033.50302@maxim-ic.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 9112C1037EE for ; Thu, 11 Nov 2010 22:17:56 +0100 (CET) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4CDC5033.50302@maxim-ic.com> 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: Jesse Marroquin Cc: Dimitris Papastamos , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, Takashi Iwai , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Hsiang , Liam Girdwood List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 02:21:07PM -0600, Jesse Marroquin wrote: > This patch adds the initial driver for the MAX98089 CODEC. I've not read this properly yet but on a first quick scan through this bears a more than passing resemblance to the MAX98088 driver - are there sufficient incompatibilities between the chips to warrant having a separate driver? http://datasheets.maxim-ic.com/en/ds/MAX98088.pdf would suggest not... Keeping a single driver means less code to maintain, which is generally a win. Variations between the parts can be accommodated by registering different controls and so on based on the I2C device ID that the system registers.