From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>
Cc: Oder Chiou <oder_chiou@realtek.com>,
"alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>,
"lgirdwood@gmail.com" <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
Bard Liao <bardliao@realtek.com>,
Gustaw Lewandowski <gustaw.lewandowski@intel.com>,
Flove <flove@realtek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] ASoC: add RT286 CODEC driver
Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 19:07:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140507180705.GJ22111@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <536A7161.7090100@metafoo.de>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1406 bytes --]
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 07:46:09PM +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> I don't think virtual controls are the right approach here. Virtual controls
> are for controls where the state is completely in software, but here the
> state is still in hardware. It's just that there is no uniform hardware map.
> But there is still some structure. So you'd have controls with custom put
> and get handlers and for DAPM widgets use the event handler.
What you just described is what I'd consider a virtual control - I don't
consider the fact that the put callbacks end up writing to the hardware
particularly substantial, as far as the framework is concerned some
driver specific thing goes off and does something but it could be
setting a variable just as well as writing to hardware.
> But I still think that the best and easiest solution is to have custom
> regmap read/write function that do the translation of logical registers to
> physical read/write operations.
That's the first time this idea has been mentioned that I recall. I
have to say I'm really not keen on pushing non-physical registers
through regmap, all the drivers that have done that previously have
ended up causing problems though if the registers were *all* fake then
there would be less issue (most of the issues have been due to having
extra registers that don't really exist). It does still feel like it's
a layering problem though.
[-- Attachment #1.2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 0 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-07 18:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-14 5:59 [PATCH v6] ASoC: add RT286 CODEC driver bardliao
2014-04-15 12:04 ` Mark Brown
2014-04-16 13:26 ` Bard Liao
2014-04-16 21:11 ` Mark Brown
2014-04-17 5:39 ` Bard Liao
2014-04-18 10:37 ` Mark Brown
2014-05-06 12:04 ` Bard Liao
2014-05-07 17:21 ` Mark Brown
2014-05-07 17:46 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2014-05-07 18:07 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2014-05-07 18:21 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2014-05-07 19:49 ` Mark Brown
2014-05-08 7:05 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2014-05-08 8:00 ` Mark Brown
2014-05-08 8:57 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2014-05-12 11:08 ` Bard Liao
2014-05-12 14:51 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2014-05-12 20:29 ` Mark Brown
2014-06-04 12:08 ` Bard Liao
2014-06-04 12:37 ` Mark Brown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140507180705.GJ22111@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=alsa-devel@alsa-project.org \
--cc=bardliao@realtek.com \
--cc=flove@realtek.com \
--cc=gustaw.lewandowski@intel.com \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=oder_chiou@realtek.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox