From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/14] media: add V4L2 DT binding documentation Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 17:51:27 +0900 Message-ID: <20121010085124.GJ17288@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1348754853-28619-1-git-send-email-g.liakhovetski@gmx.de> <1348754853-28619-5-git-send-email-g.liakhovetski@gmx.de> <20121005151057.GA5125@pengutronix.de> <20121005160242.GX1322@pengutronix.de> <20121010084006.GQ27665@pengutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20121010084006.GQ27665@pengutronix.de> Sender: linux-sh-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Sascha Hauer Cc: Guennadi Liakhovetski , linux-media@vger.kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, Sylwester Nawrocki , Laurent Pinchart , Hans Verkuil , Magnus Damm , linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Warren , Arnd Bergmann , Grant Likely List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:40:06AM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote: > Mark, when do we get the same for aSoC? ;) Well, I'm unlikely to work on it as I don't have any systems which can boot with device tree. The big, big problem you've got doing this is lots of dynamic changes at runtime and in general complicated systems. It's trivial to describe the physical links but they don't provide anything like enough information to use things. Quite frankly I'm not sure device tree is a useful investment of time for advanced audio systems anyway, it's really not solving any problems people actually have.