Hi Rob > >> Still not really a fan of this generic name. Can we define in the > >> description above what simple means. > > > > So, how about "simple-audio-card" ? > > That's missing my point. First, I think you should be defining the > actual h/w in the DT and doing the mapping of that to a simple audio > driver in the kernel. Otherwise how do you fix some quirk on a > particular platform later on without updating the DTB? I'm fine with > this being the default compatible string, but you should also require > a more specific name. Perhaps it is just <soc>-simple-audio or > <board>-simple-audio. > > Second, you need to define in this binding document what simple means. > What properties of the audio subsystem make it simple? The h/w has and > doesn't have what? How do I decide if my platform can or should use > this binding? Basically, on ASoC case, SoC/board needs <soc>-<codec>-audio-card (= not simple card) for matching each other, and this is start point. This means we need many <soc>-<codec>-audio-card.c driver. But, in some case, the difference between <socA>-<codecA> <-> <socA>-<codecB> <-> <socB>-<codecA> <-> <socB>-<codecB> was just "name". creating too many such driver was not sane for me. This simple-audio is used in such case. Of course we can update simple-audio feature (if it is very simple/common feature) but, if you need <soc/board>-audio-card which needs special feature, you need to create such driver without using simple-card. This is very normal approach on ASoC and there are many such driver. Best regards --- Kuninori Morimoto -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
