Jon Smirl wrote: > On 6/13/08, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:57:39PM -0400, Jon Smirl wrote: >> >> > In my model a lot of the code in your fabric driver would be pushed >> > into the ssi driver. So if you used ssi and a codec in the standard >> > manner, the board wouldn't need a fabric driver at all. That would >> > probably be the case for most AC97/HDA systems. >> >> >> I'd certainly like to see some standard support for setting up at least >> AC97 DAI links automatically based on the probed codec. That bit could >> probably be done by the core. HDA should be amenable to this model too >> but I haven't looked at it in anything more than passing detail yet. >> >> That's only part of the story, though. What's much more tricky is >> making the decision that you've got all the components for the sound >> subsystem - for example, there are AC97 codecs like the WM9712 and >> WM9713 which also have I2S interfaces. You also get systems which need >> to jump through hoops to set up the clocking since they're doing >> non-standard things. Simple systems would probably need an explict flag >> to say that they could be handled as such, which isn't a million miles >> off having something to load a generic machine driver. > > We can't eliminate a fabric driver is all cases, I'd just like to > minimize its need. This code has the card and codec creation code in > the fabric driver, I would push down into the ssi driver. Code in the > ssi would locate the codec and load it. The model needs to be able to > function if there is no need for a fabric driver. Like I said earlier, I don't like this idea. I don't want all this gunk in the SSI driver, and I don't see anything wrong with the fabric driver being the master that sets up all the inter-device connections. > That also flips things around, now the ssi driver needs to locate the > fabric driver, not the other way around. In this model the fabric > driver doesn't need to make a device, it just becomes a library of > code called by the ssi driver. The DMA driver is already a library that is called by the SSI. It registers itself as a regular driver, but under ASoC V2, it really acts like a library. > Code in the ssi driver could make a > list of codec parameters, pass it to the fabric driver for > modification, and then set it into the codec. That sounds too complicated. > We're missing a cross platform way to set parameters into a codec. No we're not. ASoC already provides an API for sending parameters to a codec, and if we need more than that, we can create platform resources and pass those to the codec. -- Timur Tabi Linux kernel developer at Freescale _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
