On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 03:31:44AM -0700, Kuninori Morimoto wrote: > > > >If we're already specifying the DAI links for the (D)PCM code it seems > > > >like we shouldn't also have to put DAPM routes for them in DT as well. > > > Yes, and I think we shouldn't use anything except for datahsheet pin names > > > in the devicetree routing, because otherwise we are leaking driver > > > implementation details. > It came from snd_soc_of_parse_audio_routing() > Do you mean this function itself is not good ? That's intended to be routing analogue pins to each other, not for DAI links in DPCM - for DAI links we should be getting this information from elsewhere. > > While I agree with the sentiment for this when it comes to DAIs we > > probably want to use the name the interfaces get in the documentation > > rather than pin names since they involve multiple pins working together. > Sorry, but what does your "interfaces get in the documentation" mean ? If the documentation refers to the interface as for example "I2S0" then the DT should refer to it as I2S0 too.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
