On 6/30/2020 9:02 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 06:23:49PM +0530, Sameer Pujar wrote:
On 6/30/2020 4:31 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
Why simple-card and not audio-graph-card?
Frankly speaking I have not used audio-graph-card before. I had a brief look
at the related binding. It seems it can use similar DT properties that
simple-card uses, although the binding style appears to be different.
However I am not sure if it offers better solutions to the problems I am
facing. For example, the ability to connect or form a chain of components to
realize more complicated use cases with DPCM, some of which were discussed
in [0]. Can you please help me understand why it could be preferred?
[0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/4/30/519
It's the more modern thing which covers everything simple-card does and
more, I'd expect new development to go into that rather than
simple-card.
Hi Mark & Kuninori,
For the HW I am using, there are no fixed endpoints and I am not sure if
it is allowed to have empty endpoints in audio-graph-card.
Crossbar/router provides the flexibility to connect the components in
any required order. Patch [05/23] exposes required graph and MUX
controls for the flexible configurations. Mostly, in DT, I am trying to
model the component itself and finally router can help me specify the
audio path to interconnect various components. Hence I was trying to
understand if it is really necessary to represent the links using
audio-graph-card. Kindly help me understand what more it offers. If
simple-card works fine, are we allowed to use it?
Thank you,
Sameer.
