From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Simon Horman Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 07:33:14 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: mach-shmobile: tidyup: sound card detection order Message-Id: <20120529073313.GA21702@verge.net.au> List-Id: References: <87mx4rmqzd.wl%kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> In-Reply-To: <87mx4rmqzd.wl%kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-sh@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 04:04:58PM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote: > On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 03:46:25PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: > > On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 11:38:34PM -0700, Kuninori Morimoto wrote: > > > Current sound card is using snd-simple-card, > > > but it requests probe deferral when boot, since the detection > > > timing of snd-simple-card is earlier than sh. > > > > > > Because of this behavior, if platform has some sound cards, > > > the postponed probe order was changed > > > and it breaks ALSA device list order. > > > > > > This patch makes it consistent on mackerel/ap4evb > > > > Hi Morimoto-san, > > > > Is the problem that a previous patch altered the order of the > > ALSA index of the sound cards? And this patch restores the previous order? > > > > If so, I wonder if this is really necessary as is should > > be possible to set the index using a module parameter if one > > is relying on it. > > > One would expect so. What happens if the ALSA drivers are built as > modules and inserted in random order today? If you require persistent > assignment then you will have to deal with it either through module > parameters or udev. I'm unsure if that was a rhetorical question or not, but I believe the answer is yes.