[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170810165358.GK8569@atomide.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 09:53:59 -0700
From: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To: Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel@...labora.co.uk>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 2/6] dt-bindings: sound: add motorola,cpcap-audio-codec
* Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel@...labora.co.uk> [170727 02:02]:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 12:48:28PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 05:10:26PM +0200, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> > > Motorola CPCAP is a PMIC with audio functionality, that can be
> > > found on Motorola Droid 4 and probably a few other phones from
> > > Motorola's Droid series.
> >
> > Please submit patches using subject lines reflecting the style for the
> > subsystem. This makes it easier for people to identify relevant
> > patches. Look at what existing commits in the area you're changing are
> > doing and make sure your subject lines visually resemble what they're
> > doing.
>
> Right, I did not notice, that ASoC does not follow general
> "dt-bindings: <subsys>:" DT bindings subject style. How
> do Rob and Mark find them?
>
> > > +&cpcap {
> > > + audio-codec {
> > > + compatible = "motorola,cpcap-audio-codec";
> > > + vdd-supply = <&vaudio>;
> > > + };
> > > +};
> >
> > I'd expect supplies (especially generically named supplies like this) to
> > be looked up at the chip level - aside from my general concerns with MFD
> > subnodes like this in the case of supplies it's especially problematic
> > as it makes it harder to do the generic chip level hookup in the DT and
> > it precludes other parts of the chip using the same supply (which seems
> > especially likely with a generically named supply like this).
>
> I don't follow you here. Why can't other parts of the chip use the
> same supply? Regarding the other point: Handling the audio-codec
> differently than all other sub-modules of cpcap seems much more
> problematic to me and the codec is basically the last one
> missing:
>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/arm/boot/dts/motorola-cpcap-mapphone.dtsi
Mark, any comments on the above? I'm just wondering if the
related dts changes are safe for me to pick.
Regards,
Tony
Powered by blists - more mailing lists