From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Liam Girdwood Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: Fix SPI driver binding for WM8987 Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2011 16:41:55 +0100 Message-ID: <4E415543.9040200@ti.com> References: <1312362661-4544-1-git-send-email-broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <4E41253E.2040407@ti.com> <20110809150503.GE15861@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <4E415204.8020702@ti.com> <20110809153136.GH15861@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from devils.ext.ti.com (devils.ext.ti.com [198.47.26.153]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB748245D1 for ; Tue, 9 Aug 2011 17:41:57 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <20110809153136.GH15861@opensource.wolfsonmicro.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: Mark Brown Cc: "alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" , "patches@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com" List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On 09/08/11 16:31, Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 04:28:04PM +0100, Liam Girdwood wrote: >> On 09/08/11 16:05, Mark Brown wrote: > >>> Hrm? Subject line says WM8987... > >> But the diff said WM8750 iirc. > > The issue being fixed is that the two devices are register compatible > but for SPI we were only registering a device ID for wm8750, for I2C > we'd got both IDs registered. The driver says wm8750 everywhere except > the device IDs. Ah, ok - I would have just used WM8750 in subject instead. Acked-by: Liam Girdwood