Re: [PATCH] ASoC drivers for the Freescale MPC8610 SoC

["Jon Smirl" <jonsmirl@gmail.com>]

On 1/2/08, Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:
> On 1/2/08, Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 1/2/08, Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:
> > > > Alternatively, the best place for this device would be on the ASOC
> > > > bus, but the ASOC bus hasn't been created when the platform code runs.
> > > > Maybe I can figure out a place in the platform code to create this
> > > > device after the ASOC driver has loaded and created the bus. Does the
> > > > platform code get control back after loading all of the device
> > > > drivers?
> > >
> > > Yes, but it requires the core ASoC code to not be a module.  Then you
> > > can use machine_device_initcall() to register the device at a later
> > > time.
> >
> > How about this for a simpler solution? My mpc5200-psc-ac97 and
> > mpc5200-psc-i2c drivers can create a device on the ASOC bus named
> > after the first entry in the compatible field of the root node. That
> > will cause the correct driver to get activated. I'm in the process of
> > making ASOC drivers dynamically loadable like the i2c ones.
>
> I little icky, but it doesn't sound dangerous (as in shouldn't cause
> any name conflicts).  That may be the best we can do for the time
> being.  But I don't think it is a good idea for the long term.

Simplest long term fix is to allow drivers to bind on the root node.
Make this work:

> static struct of_device_id fabric_of_match[] = {
>         {
>                 .compatible     = "fsl,MPC8610HPCD",
>         },
>         {},
> };



>
> Cheers,
> g.
>
> --
> Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
> Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.
> grant.likely@secretlab.ca
> (403) 399-0195
>


-- 
Jon Smirl
jonsmirl@gmail.com