From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: RFC: ST specific ASoC sound driver Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 11:22:14 +0000 Message-ID: <20110316112214.GB14125@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <4D809928.2000905@st.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 E23AA103938 for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2011 12:22:15 +0100 (CET) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4D809928.2000905@st.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: rajeev Cc: Takashi Iwai , "alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" , lrg@slimlogic.co.uk List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 04:34:08PM +0530, rajeev wrote: Please remember to CC maintainers on mails - I've added Liam. > I have developed a ASoC sound driver for a ST specific platform (SPEAr). > This module actually uses the Designware (Synopsys) "dw_apb_i2s_db" IP > + some ST specific glue logic on top of it. > Now I am confused as to whether I should submit a single patch for > the SPEAr ASoC driver or should I try to break the driver such that > the Designware and glue logic parts are handled separately (which given > the current shape of design seems improbable) Ideally it'd be split so other people could share the off the shelf DesignWare code if they also use the IP but it really depends on what exactly the ST specific customisations do and how much control is required for the generic part - if the control for the IP is trivial or the changes are very invasive then there's less value in splitting it. Without seeing the code it's difficult to comment.