linux-kernel - Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH v2 3/4] ASoC: simple-card: accept many DAI links

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140317161916.GL11706@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Mon, 17 Mar 2014 16:19:16 +0000
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Jyri Sarha <jsarha@...com>
Cc:	Jean-Francois Moine <moinejf@...e.fr>,
	Xiubo Li <Li.Xiubo@...escale.com>, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@...esas.com>
Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH v2 3/4] ASoC: simple-card: accept many DAI
 links

On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 11:14:13AM +0200, Jyri Sarha wrote:
> On 2014-03-14 20:40, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:

> >So, the actual solution I use is 3 DAI links (= 3 PCMs):
> >- HDMI via I2S
> >- HDMI via S/PDIF (no S/PDIF output)
> >- S/PDIF via S/PDIF (no HDMI output)

> Maybe a HW specific machine-driver would serve your case better. Of course
> it would be great to have a generic implementation that can handle this case
> too, but I am not sure if it should be called a simple-card anymore :).

I am a bit concerned about that I have to say.

> >>You need to update the DT-binding document too when you are changing the
> >>binding. That way it would also be easier to follow what you are trying
> >>to accomplish here.

> >Some people want to have 2 different patchs: one for the code and the
> >other one for the DT change. Some other people like you want only one
> >patch. Which is the right way?

> I did not mean it should be in the same patch. Part of the same series is
> fine with me. It is up to maintainer to decide these things anyway. I would
> just like to compare the document with the implementation.

If the binding is being changed in the code the documentation absolutely
must be updated as part of the same patch series if it's not already
been changed previously.  You can have documentation without code but
not code without documentation.

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