On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 10:54:38AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote: > On Sat, 8 Nov 2014 09:27:56 +0000 Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 08, 2014 at 11:38:03AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote: > > Given your previous patch are these trying to control a digital link by > > any chance? If they are they should be removed, and in any case this > > sort of thing looks like a machine driver issue. > Depends on what you mean by "control". > They declare that a digital link is, or is not, active so that the related > amplifiers, DACs, etc can be powered up or down. OK, then the driver needs to be fixed so that this is an actual DAI and not analogue. > If I shouldn't have these controls here, where should I have them? How > should I turn on/off the widgets that drive the VOICE interface? Via AIF widgets, supply widgets or something else. > You say it looks like "a machine driver issue". > alsa/soc/machine.txt says that "machine" is a synonym for "board". > I thought we were getting rid of board files and replacing them with > devicetree. You seem to be implying that we are keeping board files (under > the name "machine driver") for the audio config. > Is that correct? What is the reason for that? Yes. The board design for advanced audio subsystems (like those found it smartphones) is non-trivial and worth representing as a device in itself. Please see previous and repeated discussions on list, I'm fed up of having to go over this with everyone individually. Note also that even where some generic code that applies to multiple boards is used you *still* need something out side the driver to join everything together.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
