On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 01:59:46PM +0200, Joerg Schambacher wrote: > Am 07.09.2023 um 17:28 hat Mark Brown geschrieben: > > On Thu, Sep 07, 2023 at 06:21:50PM +0200, Joerg Schambacher wrote: > > > But in the case of the TAS-devices we even then need the PLL to > > > drive the AMP clocks. > > That's definitely a separate quirk, and does sound like it should be > > driven from the bias management or DAPM more than hw_params. > Then it makes sense to use a DT-param 'force_pll_on' and even > remove the compatible string fixes from the patch series. If this device always needs the PLL then we should just figure it out from the compatible rather than requiring a DT property which every system with the device is going to need to set. > Still, I think, this is the best part of the code to act on the PLL. > Simply instead of checking 'do we need it or not' just let it run. > What do you think? It's probably fine.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
