From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: moinejf@free.fr (Jean-Francois Moine) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 20:02:39 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v3 3/5] ASoC: tda998x: add DT documentation of the tda998x CODEC In-Reply-To: <20140204181213.GO22609@sirena.org.uk> References: <8e4231b7a55802f58a14dd07ac5cd8b0babb1dce.1391274628.git.moinejf@free.fr> <20140204181213.GO22609@sirena.org.uk> Message-ID: <20140204200239.1baf309b@armhf> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, 4 Feb 2014 18:12:13 +0000 Mark Brown wrote: > On Sat, Feb 01, 2014 at 05:48:49PM +0100, Jean-Francois Moine wrote: > > > + - compatible: must be "nxp,tda998x-codec". > > It's not clear to me why there's a separate compatible here - as far as > I can see this can only appear as part of one of these devices and > there's no addressing or other information that'd account for chip > variation so I'd not expect to need to bind this independently of the > parent. If there is no 'compatible', the CODEC module is not loaded, and, when the module is in the core, no CODEC device can be created from the DT. -- Ken ar c'henta? | ** Breizh ha Linux atav! ** Jef | http://moinejf.free.fr/