On 03/19/2014 09:31 PM, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
On 03/19/2014 08:21 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 09:15:14PM +0200, Jyri Sarha wrote:
On 03/19/2014 08:51 PM, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
When does this make sense? Either the bitclock is inverted for all of
them or for none.
On 03/19/2014 08:21 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 09:15:14PM +0200, Jyri Sarha wrote:
On 03/19/2014 08:51 PM, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
When does this make sense? Either the bitclock is inverted for all of
them or for none.
Definition of clock signal and it's inversion vari
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 09:15:14PM +0200, Jyri Sarha wrote:
> On 03/19/2014 08:51 PM, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> >When does this make sense? Either the bitclock is inverted for all of
> >them or for none.
> Definition of clock signal and it's inversion varies between chip
> manufacturers and som
On 03/19/2014 08:51 PM, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
On 03/19/2014 11:08 AM, Jyri Sarha wrote:
[...]
It may sometimes be helpful to allow overwriting link level settings
in dai
level. In order to do that it should be possible to write all daifmt
settings explicitly like this:
bitclock-inversion =
On 03/19/2014 11:08 AM, Jyri Sarha wrote:
[...]
It may sometimes be helpful to allow overwriting link level settings in dai
level. In order to do that it should be possible to write all daifmt
settings explicitly like this:
bitclock-inversion = <0>; /* <0> = no bitclock-inversion */
When does
On 2014-03-15 13:30, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
There may be many couples of CPU/CODEC DAI links.
The example 2 is extracted from the Cubox DT.
Signed-off-by: Jean-Francois Moine
---
[...]
This binding forces all the dai links to share the same card level
properties. I find it problematic in
