On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 03:16:02AM +0000, Bard Liao wrote:
> > These aren't really done properly - they're squashing all the data paths down
> > into one. Ideally there'd be a separate AIF widget for each channel. It's not
> > super urgent right now since it won't make a practical difference.
> I will modify that. Something like below, right?
> SND_SOC_DAPM_AIF_OUT("AIFOUTL", "Capture", 0, SND_SOC_NOPM, 0, 0),
> SND_SOC_DAPM_AIF_OUT("AIFOUTR", "Capture", 1, SND_SOC_NOPM, 0, 0),
Yes, exactly
> > > + regulator_3v3 = devm_regulator_get_optional(&i2c->dev,
> > > + rt5665->pdata.regulator_3v3);
> >
> > > + regulator_5v = devm_regulator_get_optional(&i2c->dev,
> > > + rt5665->pdata.regulator_5v);
> > I also just don't believe that *all* of the regulators the device has are optional.
> That is because we don't know how customers design their schematic.
> All regulators can be connected by hardware pin. It means we don't
> need to use a regular to supply it.
No, that's something the regulator API will handle for you - individual
drivers should be written with sensible error handling, the regulator
API will handle stubbing out things that are needed.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
