[PATCH v7 2/2] ASoC: fsl: Add S/PDIF machine driver

2013-08-19 Thread Nicolin Chen
This patch implements a device-tree-only machine driver for Freescale i.MX series Soc. It works with spdif_transmitter/spdif_receiver and fsl_spdif.c drivers. Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen b42...@freescale.com --- .../devicetree/bindings/sound/imx-audio-spdif.txt | 29 +

Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] ASoC: fsl: Add S/PDIF machine driver

2013-08-19 Thread Mark Rutland
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 09:35:22AM +0100, Nicolin Chen wrote: This patch implements a device-tree-only machine driver for Freescale i.MX series Soc. It works with spdif_transmitter/spdif_receiver and fsl_spdif.c drivers. Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen b42...@freescale.com ---

Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] ASoC: fsl: Add S/PDIF machine driver

2013-08-19 Thread Nicolin Chen
Hi, On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:24:58AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: Is this used semantically, or is it a completely arbitrary string? In either case I don't see why the compatible string doesn't give the driver enough to have a sensible value. I'm confused as to why we need this. The phrase

Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] ASoC: fsl: Add S/PDIF machine driver

2013-08-19 Thread Mark Rutland
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:50:43AM +0100, Nicolin Chen wrote: Hi, On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:24:58AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: Is this used semantically, or is it a completely arbitrary string? In either case I don't see why the compatible string doesn't give the driver enough to have

Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] ASoC: fsl: Add S/PDIF machine driver

2013-08-19 Thread Nicolin Chen
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:01:43AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: At least they are separate drivers as I mentioned in the commit comments. I'm not sure that the boundary of Linux drivers should necessarily determine the way we carve up the description of IP blocks, though presumably it's a

Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] ASoC: fsl: Add S/PDIF machine driver

2013-08-19 Thread Philipp Zabel
Am Montag, den 19.08.2013, 11:01 +0100 schrieb Mark Rutland: On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:50:43AM +0100, Nicolin Chen wrote: Hi, On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:24:58AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: Is this used semantically, or is it a completely arbitrary string? In either case I don't see

Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] ASoC: fsl: Add S/PDIF machine driver

2013-08-19 Thread Mark Brown
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:01:43AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:50:43AM +0100, Nicolin Chen wrote: The phrase user-visible is being used in many current docs, I don't dare to change it unless a sage gives me a suggestion. I can see that there is entrenched usage,

Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] ASoC: fsl: Add S/PDIF machine driver

2013-08-19 Thread Mark Rutland
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:21:06AM +0100, Nicolin Chen wrote: On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:01:43AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: At least they are separate drivers as I mentioned in the commit comments. I'm not sure that the boundary of Linux drivers should necessarily determine the way we

Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] ASoC: fsl: Add S/PDIF machine driver

2013-08-19 Thread Mark Rutland
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:52:01AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:01:43AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:50:43AM +0100, Nicolin Chen wrote: The phrase user-visible is being used in many current docs, I don't dare to change it unless a sage

Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] ASoC: fsl: Add S/PDIF machine driver

2013-08-19 Thread Mark Brown
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 12:31:21PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:52:01AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: This is intended to allow userspace to distinguish between systems that are electrically identical but physically distinct, for example when multiple systems are