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.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
