From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jassi brar Subject: Re: Reforming S3C I2S towards supporting I2Sv4 Date: Sun, 2 May 2010 17:28:03 +0900 Message-ID: References: <1268207335-9947-1-git-send-email-jassi.brar@samsung.com> <20100310142314.GD6850@sirena.org.uk> <20100427025848.GB24020@trinity.fluff.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-vw0-f51.google.com (mail-vw0-f51.google.com [209.85.212.51]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D724244C1 for ; Sun, 2 May 2010 10:28:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: by vws16 with SMTP id 16so765128vws.38 for ; Sun, 02 May 2010 01:28:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: 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: Kyungmin Park Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, Mark Brown , Jassi Brar , Ben Dooks List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 1:38 PM, Kyungmin Park wrote: > Do you have a plan to move or create the sound/soc/samsung or others > for future Samsung SoCs? I don't have any such plan atm, but I am not against moving sound/soc/s3c24xx to sound/soc/samsung > And can you make a document which SoCs use I2S version? > e.g., > s3c24xx use I2Sv3 > s3c64xx use I2Sv3 or 4?? > s5p64xx use I2Sv4 > s5pc1xx use I2Sv5 > and so on > > How about to give name samsung-i2cvx for common use instead of cpu name? > I think it is better to call drivers by the first soc that is supported in mainline. Any new soc, that has the controller reused, should be handled by the same old driver. For example, if we have driver for s5pc100, then let s5pc110/v210 use the same s5pc100-i2s.c That is, after soc support in current drivers is sorted out.