linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: Dove: Add the audio devices in DT

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20130829182010.GQ10783@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Thu, 29 Aug 2013 19:20:11 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>
Cc:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Jean-Francois Moine <moinejf@...e.fr>,
	Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@...rix.com>,
	liam.r.girdwood@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: Dove: Add the audio devices in DT

On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 08:02:27PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> 
> it is referring the same differences Russell already mentioned. But I
> already came to the conclusion, that we don't need the information in
> the binding. For example, if you use that controller on Dove and you
> hook it up for SPDIF-in (which it hasn't), than I consider this a
> DT bug. No need to double-check that in the driver. From that p-o-v,
> please just let the current binding as is.

OK, great - none of these devices have any differences which are visible
only within the controller, they're all extra external interfaces?

> Thomas Petazzoni mentioned earlier, that the _usual_ procedure to
> name the compatibles is to pick the SoC that the IP appeared in first.
> But I am also fine with "marvell,mvebu-audio" and adding compatibles
> for dove or kirkwood _if_ we will ever need them.

Yeah, it doesn't make much difference either way so long as the base
name isn't utterly confusing.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)