On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 09:38:55PM +0200, Belisko Marek wrote: > > Is there any burning reason for adding the linux,bt-sco compatible? > No no real reason just want to keep that if somebody would like use it from DT > referenced by bt-sco entry (similar as platform data). I'm adding DT > support for it because I want to use > this for W2CBW003 chip and I can use simply "linux,bt-sco" property in > DT or I instead of that add new vendor > prefix + add new compatible entry which is IMO much harder that > reference it by generic name. OK, can you change the patch to just have the part specific name please? If we were to have a generic binding it should really be richer than this, for example I think I've seen BT devices that take in 16kHz streams rather than 8kHz and there are often requirements for oversized data frames as well.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
