[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YkRoC30JLDMeVi1B@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 15:24:11 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Jiaxin Yu <jiaxin.yu@...iatek.com>
Cc: NĂcolas F. R. A. Prado
<nfraprado@...labora.com>, robh+dt@...nel.org, tzungbi@...gle.com,
angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com, aaronyu@...gle.com,
matthias.bgg@...il.com, trevor.wu@...iatek.com, linmq006@...il.com,
alsa-devel@...a-project.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@...iatek.com,
Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [v7 2/4] ASoC: mediatek: mt8192: refactor for I2S3 DAI link of
speaker
On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 10:06:24PM +0800, Jiaxin Yu wrote:
> On Wed, 2022-03-30 at 13:30 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Making a previously optional property required means that systems
> > that
> > previously worked may stop working unless they update their DT, DTs
> > may
> > be distributed separately to the kernel and perhaps even baked into
> > firmware or similar.
> Thank you for your detailed answer. I should keep the driver's behavior
> consistent with the description of dt-bindings. The "mediatek,hdmi-
> codec" needs to be set as the required property. Is my understanding
> right?
The binding document and code should match so if one is changed the
other needs to be changed too.
In theory we should never change a previously optional property to
required which would mean that the code should be updated to reflect the
binding document, however sometimes the DT isn't actually used as a
stable intereface by anything for a given property or device type so we
can get away with changing things.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists