From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754444AbbIHJg0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Sep 2015 05:36:26 -0400 Received: from nasmtp01.atmel.com ([192.199.1.246]:17585 "EHLO DVREDG02.corp.atmel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754395AbbIHJgV (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Sep 2015 05:36:21 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ASoC: atmel-classd: DT binding for Class D audio amplifier driver To: Mark Brown References: <1441086101-15303-1-git-send-email-songjun.wu@atmel.com> <1441086101-15303-3-git-send-email-songjun.wu@atmel.com> <20150903114316.GV12027@sirena.org.uk> <55EC0AFE.3080809@atmel.com> <20150907162548.GW5313@sirena.org.uk> CC: , , , , , , , , , , , , From: "Wu, Songjun" Organization: ATMEL Message-ID: <55EEAC0D.7010003@atmel.com> Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 17:36:13 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20150907162548.GW5313@sirena.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 9/8/2015 00:25, Mark Brown wrote: > On Sun, Sep 06, 2015 at 05:44:30PM +0800, Wu, Songjun wrote: >> On 9/3/2015 19:43, Mark Brown wrote: > >>> Why is this a separate DT node? It seems that this IP is entirely self >>> contained so I'm not clear why we need a separate node for the card, the >>> card is usually a separate node because it ties together multiple >>> different devices in the system but that's not the case here. > >> The classD can finish the audio function without other devices. >> But I want to reuse the code in ASoC, leave many things(like creating PCM, >> DMA operations) to ASoC, then the driver can only focus on how to configure >> classD. >> The classD IP is divided to tree parts logically, platform, CPU dai, >> and codec, and these parts are registered to ASoC. > >> This separate DT node is needed in ASoC, ties these tree parts in ClassD. > > Sure, there's no problem at all having that structure in software but it > should be possible to do this without having to represent this structure > in DT. It should be possible to register the card at the same time as > the rest of the components rather than needing the separate device in > the DT. > Do you mean using a single entry in the DT for the whole classD system and instantiate ASoC components from it. For now, there are two entry, they could be combined to one entry.