On 12/06/2017 06:45 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 03:20:19PM -0600, Andrew F. Davis wrote: >> On 12/01/2017 07:26 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > >>> The advantage being...? Not all architectures use DT or ACPI so it's >>> not clear that this is a step forwards in itself. > >> Simplifies the code in several places, and you don't need to use DT or >> ACPI, it probes just fine anyway you normally add an I2C device. > >> All we are dropping here is the platform_data way of specifying mic-bias >> voltage, which if you are wanting to do that in an out-of-tree board >> file, then I'm sure you can locally modify this driver to use your >> wanted voltage setting by default. > > Then if you want to upstream the driver you'll have to add the platform > data support again. Like I say not all architectures have anything > other than board files. > Then they can try, but they will rightfully get nack'd and told to stop using board files and use DT/ACPI. Most upstream architectures don't use board files anymore anyway, so I doubt this will ever happen. Besides, if they haven't upstreamed their code then it is their problem if this patch breaks them, we shouldn't hold up upstream work for out-of-tree code, especially theoretical out-of-tree code that will never exist. _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
