On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 02:55:57PM +0300, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:

> +dmic_codec: dmic_codec@0 { /* generic DMIC codec */
> +	compatible = "generic,dmic-codec";
> +};

Why is this called "dmic-codec" and not "dmic"?  We probably need to
have a think about this in the context of the handling of random
on-board passive components in general - things like jacks and so on - 
is the most sensible thing to have a platform device for everything, or
is that getting too noisy?