On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 10:49:27AM -0500, Timur Tabi wrote: > Mark Brown wrote: > > But wouldn't it now be legal to represent the machine driver as a device > > in its own right, even if it is connected via GPIOs? > I'm not sure I understand that, so let me say this: > When a driver wants to be probed, it creates a list that describes the kind of > nodes it wants to be probed on. Typically, the list includes the contents of > the "compatible" property. The kernel then scans the device tree, and calls the > driver for each matching node. Right, but you could not then idiomatically have a device tree entry saying something to the effect of "This board has a Frobnitz 2000 with control line 1 connected to GPIO4 and control line 2 connected to GPIO5" which would register the presence of this other device (in the same way as you have an entry for an I2C device)? _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
