> On Aug 10, 2023, at 5:30 AM, Charles Keepax <ckeepax@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 09, 2023 at 07:10:28PM +0000, James Ogletree wrote:
>> +
>> +static int cs40l50_pseq_write(struct cs40l50_private *cs40l50, u32 addr, u32 data)
>> +{
>> +
>> +static int cs40l50_owt_upload(struct cs40l50_private *cs40l50, s16 *in_data, u32 in_data_nibbles)
>> +{
>
> These pseq and OWT bits, could they be shared with l26?
> Definitely worth syncing with those guys, my assumption is the
> wavetable/pseq won't have changed much and it might be nice to
> factor these bits out into some library code that both drivers
> can use.
The pseq code most certainly can, likely the OWT code, perhaps others. I assume it is
acceptable to move some of these functions to a library in this patch set, even though this is
the only driver utilizing them as far as mainline is concerned? In other words, we shouldn’t
wait for one of L26 or L50 drivers to be accepted before splitting off the common code as part
of the others’ patchset? I’m probably overcomplicating; just want to be sure on the process here.
Everything else in your review will be fixed in V4. Thank you.
Regards,
James Ogletree
