On 10/01/2024 13:57, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 01:51:03PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 10/01/2024 12:37, Mark Brown wrote: >>> On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 12:07:30PM +0100, Jerome Brunet wrote: > >>>> If restricting things here is really important, defaulting to 0 (with a >>>> comment explaining it) and letting actual devices then override the >>>> value would feel less 'made up' > >> Wait, what do you mean by "letting actual devices then override"? It's >> already like this. Nothing changed. What do you refer to? > > The suggestion is that instead of limiting to 1 and having one device Nothing limits here to 0. I limit from all technically possible values to reasonable subset. > override limit to 0 and have all the devices that need 1 override as > well. I don't think that actual default value for this should be provided. This should be conscious choice when writing bindings and driver. Similarly we do already for some other #cells: #io-channel-cells, address/size-cells (dtschema), #mux-control-cells and others. I agree we do not restrict all of them, though. However I do not see single reason to allow developers use 3 as #sound-dai-cells. Best regards, Krzysztof
