[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7e312b05-857f-40a6-a1a1-a954dfea7044@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 11:37:09 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, linux-sound@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: dt-bindings: dai-common: Narrow possible
sound-dai-cells
On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 12:07:30PM +0100, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> On Tue 09 Jan 2024 at 22:38, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> > Instead of accepting any value for sound-dai-cells, the common DAI
> > properties schema should narrow them to sane choice.
> Adding a constraint solely based on current usage feels wrong.
> A DAI provider in its generic form must have the sound-dai-cells to
> provide one. It says nothing about how many parameters an actual device
> might need. That is the idea behind this binding.
> It is up to the device specific bindings to define that value.
> If restricting things here is really important, defaulting to 0 (with a
> comment explaining it) and letting actual devices then override the
> value would feel less 'made up'
I tend to agree.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists