[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:16:12 -0600
From: Jesse Marroquin <jesse.marroquin@...im-ic.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
CC: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
Liam Girdwood <lrg@...mlogic.co.uk>,
Peter Hsiang <Peter.Hsiang@...im-ic.com>,
Dimitris Papastamos <dp@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
"alsa-devel@...a-project.org" <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: Add MAX98089 CODEC driver
Thanks for pointing out the I2C device ID. After looking at the existing
drivers that have multiple I2C IDs, I see that the devices can be uniquely
identified. With this we should be able to accommodate both devices with
the same driver.
On 11/11/2010 03:18 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 02:21:07PM -0600, Jesse Marroquin wrote:
>> This patch adds the initial driver for the MAX98089 CODEC.
>
> I've not read this properly yet but on a first quick scan through this
> bears a more than passing resemblance to the MAX98088 driver - are there
> sufficient incompatibilities between the chips to warrant having a
> separate driver? http://datasheets.maxim-ic.com/en/ds/MAX98088.pdf
> would suggest not...
>
> Keeping a single driver means less code to maintain, which is generally
> a win. Variations between the parts can be accommodated by registering
> different controls and so on based on the I2C device ID that the system
> registers.
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists