From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2011 10:41:56 +0100
Subject: [PATCH v2] ASoC: omap: convert per-board modules to platform
	drivers
In-Reply-To: <20110908235903.GA6370@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
References: <1315503297-8365-1-git-send-email-mans.rullgard@linaro.org>
	<CABb+yY0b607kDSGU+trycqQuvGMhC-zpHcv20wjgmEcaK7dz8Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAG5Tg6UOuztenNid1=YbH9a4ZH5MqV4YhohG+r9R+7F=zXs=CQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<3110288.bQbb0H2ME1@wuerfel>
	<1315520956.4126.3.camel@finisterre.wolfsonmicro.main>
	<20110908223720.GA21469@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
	<20110908224731.GB5201@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
	<20110908230102.GB21469@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
	<20110908235903.GA6370@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Message-ID: <20110909094156.GE6918@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 04:59:04PM -0700, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 12:01:02AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 03:47:31PM -0700, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
> > > What will happen for device tree is that there will be a device in the
> > > device tree for the ASoC board.
> 
> > Sounds like you just solved the machine_is_xxx() problem in ASoC land too
> > there.  If you're _already_ going for separate devices to describe the
> > ASoC stuff on the board, then there's no reason that couldn't have already
> > been done to eliminate the machine_is_xxx() usage in ASoC - rather than
> > complaining about machine_is_xxx() not being a very good solution.
> 
> The problem is that someone has to manually go and add the device to
> every board that needs one and people find that tedious and slightly
> inelegant

Sheesh.  So now you're arguing against your statement above?  Please
stop wasting my time.