Jon Smirl wrote:
> On 1/1/08, Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 12/19/07, Timur Tabi <timur@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> + ssi@16000 {
>>> + compatible = "fsl,ssi";
>>> + cell-index = <0>;
>>> + reg = <16000 100>;
>>> + interrupt-parent = <&mpic>;
>>> + interrupts = <3e 2>;
>>> + fsl,mode = "i2s-slave";
>>> + codec {
>>> + compatible = "cirrus,cs4270";
>>> + /* MCLK source is a stand-alone oscillator */
>>> + bus-frequency = <bb8000>;
>>> + };
>>> + };
>> Does this need to be bus-frequency? It's always called MCLK in all of
>> the literature.
>>
>> In my case the MCLK comes from a chip on the i2c bus that is
>> programmable How would that be encoded?.
>
> Looking at the cs4270 codec driver it is controlled by i2c (supports
> SPI too). What happened to the conversation about putting codecs on
> the controlling bus and then linking them to the data bus?
The current CS4270 driver doesn't support device trees. When I wrote
it, the idea of putting I2C info in the device tree was not finalized,
and since the driver is supposed to be cross-platform, I decided to do
it the old-fashioned way. Before I update the code, however, I'm
waiting for:
1) The current code to be accepted into the tree
2) ASoC is updated to V2
3) The current drivers are updated to support ASoC V2.
I think ASoC V2 will make it easier to support device trees, but I'm not
ready yet for that.
> If that's the case the cs4270 should be in the i2c bus node (missing
> currently) and then a link from the SSI bus would point to it.
The CS4270 is a child of both the I2C bus *and* the SSI bus. It needs
to have two nodes, one under each. Your're right in that there needs to
be a link, but until the code is updated to ASoC V2, I think it's
premature to add that support.
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
