On Wednesday 15 of April 2009 04:23:49 Eric Miao wrote:> On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 5:42 AM, Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:> > On Tuesday 14 of April 2009 21:50:36 Mark Brown wrote:> >> On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 08:51:19PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:> >> > +static struct pxa2xx_ac97_platform_data palmld_ac97_pdata = {> >> > + .reset_gpio = 95,> >> > +};> >>> >> The type of this will need changing to reflect the patch that got merged> >> for this but other than that minor point this approach is fine.> >> > OK, shall I change it and resend (ps. to what if you dont mind telling> > me?) ? Also, do you want to push it through also tree or ARM tree ? I'm> > for the second option as it's more of a bugfix suitable for that tree.>> Sorry, late on this. The changes to the platform part look OK to me,>> and some minor things you may have another look:> > -static int __init palm27x_asoc_init(void)> > +static int palm27x_asoc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)>> __devinit
Thanks, true, will revise it later today and resend ...>> > {> > int ret;> >> > @@ -208,6 +208,10 @@ static int __init palm27x_asoc_init(void)> > machine_is_palmld()))> > return -ENODEV;> >> > + if (pdev->dev.platform_data)> > + palm27x_ep_gpio = ((struct palm27x_asoc_info *)> > + (pdev->dev.platform_data))->jack_gpio;> > +>> This is not so readable, I'd prefer to introduce a variable for the> 'struct palm27x_asoc_info *' pointer.
Come on, we are not doing the kernel only for ub...u so this should be OK for everyone who can code in C. :-)>> > ret = gpio_request(palm27x_ep_gpio, "Headphone Jack");> > if (ret)> > return ret;
_______________________________________________Alsa-devel mailing listAlsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
