On Fri, Feb 03, 2023 at 12:14:21PM +0100, Herve Codina wrote:
> +static const struct snd_kcontrol_new x9250_controls_std[] = {
> + SOC_SINGLE_EXT("CMD0", 0, 0, 255, 0, x8250_kctrl_cmd_get, x8250_kctrl_cmd_put),
> + SOC_SINGLE_EXT("CMD1", 1, 0, 255, 0, x8250_kctrl_cmd_get, x8250_kctrl_cmd_put),
> + SOC_SINGLE_EXT("CMD2", 2, 0, 255, 0, x8250_kctrl_cmd_get, x8250_kctrl_cmd_put),
> + SOC_SINGLE_EXT("CMD3", 3, 0, 255, 0, x8250_kctrl_cmd_get, x8250_kctrl_cmd_put),
> +};
These control names feel a bit icky but given that they have board
specific functions I don't see a way to sensibly rewrite them. However
I do wonder if we might be better off having this as an IIO driver and
having a binding that lets us import IIO outputs into sound cards - I'm
guessing there are other non-audio applications for this hardware?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
