[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161104203342.aizjufjokuqrlyhh@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 14:33:42 -0600
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@...esas.com>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Linux-ALSA <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Simon <horms@...ge.net.au>,
Laurent <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
Guennadi <g.liakhovetski@....de>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
Linux-DT <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/17] ASoC: add simple-graph-card document
On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 01:19:58AM +0000, Kuninori Morimoto wrote:
> +This Simple-Graph-Card should be located as CPU driver's port[s].
> +And then, CPU driver need to probe it by itself.
This document really needs quite a bit of fleshing out but I'm not sure
that should be a blocker for the series as a whole especially given that
English is not your native language - we can build out later. I think
based on what I'm understanding here I like what I'm seeing. It'd be
good to get some confirmation from the people with more of_graph
knowledge that this is a good usage.
One thing I'm not 100% clear on here is why it has to be a CPU DAI (I'm
guessing just one of them though the above says ports as an option?)
that creates the card? Is there a concrete reason for that or is it
just being defined as good pracctice?
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (456 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists