From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: rt5640: Use the platform data for DMIC settings Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 10:37:39 -0600 Message-ID: <533999D3.1060905@wwwdotorg.org> 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> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from avon.wwwdotorg.org (avon.wwwdotorg.org [70.85.31.133]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B2F0265171 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 18:45:17 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <20140331160508.GU2269@sirena.org.uk> 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: Mark Brown Cc: Oder Chiou , bardliao@realtek.com, alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, lgirdwood@gmail.com, flove@realtek.com List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On 03/31/2014 10:05 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 09:45:01AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: >> On 03/28/2014 05:46 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > >>> The driver has no DT support at all at the minute but if it's being used >>> on platforms using DT (which of course it is now I think about it - I >>> just looked for the DT support when reviewing) then yes it should. > >> The driver doesn't have an OF match table (I'll send a patch to fix that >> soon), but certainly does support DT; see rt5640_parse_dt(). > > Oh, dear. That's not clever and we do need the IDs adding, that's the > baseline thing needed for DT support. 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.