Let me clarify, just in case, The patch-2/10 http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2009-September/000714.html enables this MACHINE driver to run 2 channels(of the 6 possible) of the I2S-v4 with the extant S3C CPU drivers, which do the job fine. The extant CPU drivers are inadequate only if we want 6channels and h/w mixing support. On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 4:31 PM, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 10:49:50AM +0900, jassi brar wrote: >> On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 1:08 AM, Mark Brown > >> > I've applied this with a couple of additional fixups below. I've added >> > a dependency on BROKEN since the IISv4 support is not yet present so >> > there's no chance of it working yet. > >> well, i sent patches for CPU support also. they are simply put on hold until >> something is decided. if i were given a suggestion atleast i cud try doing that. >> anyways, the machine driver will almost remain the same in future when we >> the CPU support is there. > > I think there was enough feedback on the CPU patches? IIRC the main > issues were that the driver will need some way to tell that it's an > IISv4 block (which it would be able to do with the existing arch/arm but > not with the patches you sent) Is it a bad idea to use only part, shared with I2S-v3, of I2S-v4 controller when the CPU driver doesn't yet support other distinguishing features? If yes, then I shud start writing the 6channel and h/w mixing stuff for the CPU driver. If no, then my patches can be accepted in current or modified form. When 6channel and/or h/w mixing is implemented in the CPU drivers we just enable those features in the controller. > and that the audio-bus clock has to be > idmplemented so that the driver can probe (or the driver will need to be > able to carry on if it can't get the clock). somehow i missed emailing that patch. will resend with other parts. >> Btw, I understand as soon as i see a newer for-2.6.xx branch i shud start >> submitting against that. Right? > > For new features, yes. Bug fixes should be done against the version > destined for Linus' current tree if the issue applies there. got it. thanks Another question ... The platform device s3c64xx_device_iisv4 is defined in arch/arm/plat-s3c/dev-audio.c whereas I2S_v4 is available only for S3C6410 and newer SoCs. Shudn't we define it somewhere like arch/arm/plat-s3c64xx/dev-audio.c? I ask because soon I'll be submitting the PCM controller CPU driver for S3C64XX and i wish to define it for s3c64xx specific platform, not the generic s3c. Please suggest. _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
