[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161117050552.GA2698@localhost>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 10:35:52 +0530
From: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Charles Keepax <ckeepax@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
Hardik Shah <hardik.t.shah@...el.com>,
alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
tiwai@...e.de, pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com,
lgirdwood@...il.com, plai@...eaurora.org, patches.audio@...el.com,
Sanyog Kale <sanyog.r.kale@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 01/14] SoundWire: Add SoundWire bus driver documentation
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 05:59:29PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 07:59:14PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 02:15:48PM +0000, Charles Keepax wrote:
>
> > > slaves register to that. This also has the nice property that its
> > > easy to create devices that sit behind other buses, for example
> > > here we might want a SoundWire master that sits behind a SPI bus.
> > > But you seem to have gone in the other direction and have the
> > > master sitting on the same bus as the slaves.
>
> > Since the controller on our SoC was enumerable, people went with this
> > approach. In this hindsight that may not have been the best choice.
>
> Doing buses properly isn't an obstacle to doing enumeration, indeed I'd
> expect it to make it a lot easier - just have your driver for your
> controller do the enumeration at probe time.
Yes it is not :) This is somthing we are fixing now..
--
~Vinod
Powered by blists - more mailing lists