On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 03:35:48PM +0200, Jarkko Nikula wrote: > Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > If DAPM core knows which widget belongs to which component, than I see no real > > problem with this method. The DAPM would work just fine. The PCM operatins would > > only apply to component with DAI. > Actually these are already well separated in current ASoC. Like my RFC > patch didn't not need touch soc-dapm.c at all and efectively other > changes were around codec probing/removal and by not registering the > PCM. That's pretty much where I'm coming from - we already have most of the infrastructure, we just need to get the devices into the system but once we do that we should be able to cope with everything already. > > > If I counted correctly we have currently only three amplifier drivers: > > > tpa6130a2.c, wm2000.c and wm9090.c so separation doesn't sound worth of > > > trouble at this point as the core serves well those cases also. > > One more: max9877, if I recall correctly that was the first amp driver? > Yeah, true. Looks like wm9090.c doesn't need any conversion after we > are able to register dailess codecs but those three can be then > converted to use standard probing mechanism and let them register itself > own widgets and controls. I.e. machine drivers don't need to call those > tailored _add_controls functions. Yup, WM9090 is a DAIless CODEC already as it's using the register cache. The systems where it's typically deployed have a stub CODEC normally so this happens to work as-is, it wouldn't work as-is otherwise. _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
