[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YnztJxdSFau6SYC5@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 12:19:03 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Tommaso Merciai <tommaso.merciai@...rulasolutions.com>
Cc: linux-amarula@...rulasolutions.com, linuxfancy@...glegroups.com,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: max98088: add support for reg_4a_cfg_bypass reg
On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 01:09:59PM +0200, Tommaso Merciai wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 11:53:07AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 12:46:42PM +0200, Tommaso Merciai wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 11:12:02AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > > These look like they should be DAPM controls since they're controlling
> > > > audio routing but they're being added as regular controls.
> > > Sorry again. You suggest to create a new structure for these entries,
> > > for example:
> > If that's how they fit into the routing for the device, yes - you'd need
> > to define the bypass mixer as well and set up appropraite routes.
> I added this reg as regular controls because this reg is pretty generic
> as you can see this controll bypass of some output, not all.
> What do you think about?
That sounds exactly like a DAPM control, please make them DAPM controls.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists