On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 01:56:32PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 08/22/2013 05:40 AM, Nicolin Chen wrote: > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/spdif-receiver.txt > > If I understand correctly, this doc for the dummy codec should be invalid? > Yes, I'm not convinced that binding is a good idea; it describes > something that often doesn't actually exist in HW. (Sometimes there's a > real S/PDIF receiving device on board, but sometimes there's nothing > except a jack/connector). > It'd be useful if other DT binding maintainers could weigh in on this to > confirm/deny my thoughts. I think the binding should be changed to replace the word "dummy" with "generic" and perhaps some verbiage about not requiring software configuration. I think given the unidirectional nature of S/PDIF it's reasonable to represent a jack like this - the hardware can't generally tell if there's anything at the other end of the link anyway, for all pratical purposes the transmit end just has to blindly send.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
