On Thu, 2 Sep 2010 15:25:18 +0100 Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 02:17:29PM +0300, Jarkko Nikula wrote: > > > I don't see it are there any problems. For me it looks the routes in > > WM9090 are unique and registered to own codec instance so there should > > not be route prefixing needed. > > Meh, right. DAPM isn't coping with things that cross CODECs really. > This will need to be looked at. > > > How these amplifier drivers are actually meant to be probed? Currently > > struct snd_soc_codec_driver->probe is called only from > > soc_probe_dai_link. > > We need to set up a list of anciliary devices which are registered > without DAIs for this. So we need to split these into three separate problems: - Prefixing - DAPM linking between codecs - Registering DAIless codecs in machine drivers What you think: is it better to hold my prefixing patch until DAPM linking is solved or can it be applied before? I mean if we need to go some global, not codec based DAPM, then there is need to prefix but not if DAPM remains per codec. -- Jarkko _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
