From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-gy0-f170.google.com (mail-gy0-f170.google.com [209.85.160.170]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92092B7D27 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2010 13:44:40 +1000 (EST) Received: by gyf2 with SMTP id 2so7320189gyf.15 for ; Wed, 28 Apr 2010 20:44:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: glikely@secretlab.ca In-Reply-To: <1272502322.24542.135.camel@pasglop> References: <1272314980-23679-1-git-send-email-timur@freescale.com> <1272350168.24542.6.camel@pasglop> <20100427095440.GA15492@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> <1272362955.24542.24.camel@pasglop> <1272502322.24542.135.camel@pasglop> From: Grant Likely Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 21:44:18 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH 1/2] powerpc: add platform registration for ALSA SoC drivers To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, kumar.gala@freescale.com, Mark Brown , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Timur Tabi , devicetree-discuss , lrg@slimlogic.co.uk List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 6:52 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Wed, 2010-04-28 at 17:13 -0500, Timur Tabi wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Grant Likely wrote: >> >> > The sound0 node needs a compatible value, >> >> I knew I was forgetting something >> >> > the sound-device node should >> > probably have one too. >> >> The aliases, cpus, and memory node don't have a compatible property, >> and I was modeling the design after the aliases node. > > aliases is a bad choice, it's very very special and is neither a device > nor a virtual device, like chosen. > > cpus is more of a match in your case. > > In any case, I agree, you may not really need a compatible prop for the > virtual device. In fact, Grant, do we really need an enclosing node like > that ? Mostly I'm concerned about 'polluting' the root node in a way that we'd regret later; but perhaps I'm being overly conservative. The sound node will still be uniquely identified by it's compatible property, so perhaps I'm fretting over nothing. > In any case, it's no big deal and shouldn't have much impact on > the design. Right, the point has been reached of quibbling over trivialities. g. -- Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.