From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: rt5640: Use the platform data for DMIC settings Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 18:26:22 +0100 Message-ID: <20140331172622.GZ2269@sirena.org.uk> References: <1395974778-4217-1-git-send-email-oder_chiou@realtek.com> <53359DDD.7090900@wwwdotorg.org> <20140328234659.GA21628@sirena.org.uk> <53398D7D.3010507@wwwdotorg.org> <20140331160508.GU2269@sirena.org.uk> <533999D3.1060905@wwwdotorg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4953400106745565436==" Return-path: Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk (mezzanine.sirena.org.uk [106.187.55.193]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 403AB261A7E for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 19:26:38 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <533999D3.1060905@wwwdotorg.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: Stephen Warren Cc: Oder Chiou , bardliao@realtek.com, alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, lgirdwood@gmail.com, flove@realtek.com List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org --===============4953400106745565436== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="70fLfmUGd5x0AJTB" Content-Disposition: inline --70fLfmUGd5x0AJTB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 10:37:39AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > I really wish we would make up our minds about this. > For I2C (and SPI and perhaps others) the I2C match table works fine as a > replacement for the of_match table. The only issue might be different > manufacturers with the same chip names. If this is a problem, why is > fallback to the I2C match table even allowed any more; we should mandate > that OF matching only works via the OF match table. > When DT was young, Grant tried to require of_match for everything for > completeness, and then I tried enforcing that for reviews, and then > Grant said not to bother with that, so I stopped, and now you're saying > it's required again. I really wish I could get consistency in how this > kind of thing is supposed to work. It's difficult for contributors to > know what to do if reviewers keep flip-flopping over time. Well, *I've* not been flip flopping on this, frankly I was unaware that anyone thought it was a particularly good idea to actively not include the match table. It's true that as a matter of practicality you don't need to bother at the minute but I think especially once you're adding any explicit code at all to the driver the explicit match strings ought to be there too. I suspect this may have been a pragmatic suggestion due to all the complaints about churn generated by DT. --70fLfmUGd5x0AJTB Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJTOaU7AAoJELSic+t+oim9hW8QAJbzEpzlOWM8BWiaZkIzgNkQ wu7tvv1ClHcdEW5QB+E2bYss77JOhIodlQNwemaL9mDnN28GAy4XtJR812q6JCDa 6BpFsfaE3sT2SKyCOt5iT/MkKb8S1LJW+mBLDShauNhJ4xg0lT3JzbjgRwm4F6B5 j2Lf5DyCna3VQNsGLoi9EZ4qPNPcbMWPK0Xy99iGRelzSiRu1meWRDLIuUdSkCqq NHGn2y22BkdxGCD6rpXPzryPEjQ9fjDVHEECWkkMnTpLP8nb3SX6eLVvPs4TnokR egCSyjftIRclK+EBdOV6g4GQFxMYags7/5TpJzCs5d13lj66zTPZRf6eY1m+3xUD L1f5uhbiR1YS/6kyW34rlM/bWKQi5V3atohpeswiS05bimOMN/iejchF/Rw85F2O PkAWNfn1om8ChiAILGRPxOUyCSYTGpvax2uO0BMYYzFlsdRiLtU22KFC9lzprE7u NW5hsURrwjkj0PdJbxn0ZDMwNcExuAJVASXPFmj1LX3p9EO/WqbPyyOblo/uTAdm N4VyWHa37vaQCxZwDIzXZdxruY9Kl44GzoL7R6M8H59zb44sDMaoacBuw4Xz3sAe EbdmzuGiOUmCLaHXPLG3X6Yh/JcJ9XaGQ3b9YQhmqlBzlUaeMradTDDuX+egEiL0 9NkdlPyXd3os0ib41ihZ =Mu8h -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --70fLfmUGd5x0AJTB-- --===============4953400106745565436== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline --===============4953400106745565436==--