On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 06:16:33PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 11:06:34AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
I'm okay with that. How about fsl/mpc5200-of-machine.c for now?
(only the mpc5200 i2s driver uses it at the moment). It can always be
renamed if other folks want to
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 01:17:20AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
Okay, I've changed my mind. :-) I'll back off a bit from this extreme and
call it:
sound/soc/fsl/soc-of-simple.c
Does that sound okay? If non-freescale chips decide to use it then it
can be moved out of the freescale
Grant Likely wrote:
Okay, I've changed my mind. :-) I'll back off a bit from this extreme and
call it:
sound/soc/fsl/soc-of-simple.c
That works for me.
And please don't forget to CC: me on any discussion involving sound/soc/fsl.
--
Timur Tabi
Linux Kernel Developer @ Freescale
On 7/15/08, Mark Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 07:45:46PM -0400, Jon Smirl wrote:
On 7/14/08, Timur Tabi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark Brown wrote:
chassis - on Linux drivers can be automatically loaded based on these
strings. See
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 09:08:28AM -0400, Jon Smirl wrote:
On 7/15/08, Mark Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Binding isn't the issue here - it's loading the driver in the first
place. Once the drivers are loaded they can (hopefully) figure out if
they are running on appropriate hardware.
On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 02:39:29AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
Simple utility layer for creating ASoC machine instances based on data
in the OpenFirmware device tree. OF aware platform drivers and codec
drivers register themselves with this framework and the framework
automatically
On 7/14/08, Mark Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 02:39:29AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
Simple utility layer for creating ASoC machine instances based on data
in the OpenFirmware device tree. OF aware platform drivers and codec
drivers register themselves with
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 10:13:14AM -0400, Jon Smirl wrote:
On 7/14/08, Mark Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ideally someone from the PowerPC community would sign off on this -
given the nature and volume of discussion people obviously have very
Grant is one of the core PowerPC developers.
Jon Smirl wrote:
Which are we going to call it, fabric or machine?
Fabric.
--
Timur Tabi
Linux kernel developer at Freescale
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Mark Brown wrote:
The PowerPC side isn't without fault too. PowerPC still doesn't have a
good way to load the fabric/machine driver.
I'm finding it difficult to square these two statements - from an ASoC
point of view the main thing this patch is doing is adding a machine
driver and that's
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 10:14 AM, Timur Tabi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark Brown wrote:
The PowerPC side isn't without fault too. PowerPC still doesn't have a
good way to load the fabric/machine driver.
I'm finding it difficult to square these two statements - from an ASoC
point of view the
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 11:14:41AM -0500, Timur Tabi wrote:
Mark Brown wrote:
I'm finding it difficult to square these two statements - from an ASoC
point of view the main thing this patch is doing is adding a machine
driver and that's not something that's going to go away.
Jon's
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 7:49 AM, Mark Brown
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 02:39:29AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
+static void of_snd_soc_register_device(struct of_snd_soc_device *of_soc)
+{
+ struct platform_device *pdev;
+ int rc;
+
+ /* Only register the
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 11:06:34AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
I'm okay with that. How about fsl/mpc5200-of-machine.c for now?
(only the mpc5200 i2s driver uses it at the moment). It can always be
renamed if other folks want to use it for other chips.
That seems reasonable so long as you're
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Mark Brown
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 11:14:41AM -0500, Timur Tabi wrote:
Mark Brown wrote:
I'm finding it difficult to square these two statements - from an ASoC
point of view the main thing this patch is doing is adding a machine
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 11:16 AM, Mark Brown
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 11:06:34AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
I'm okay with that. How about fsl/mpc5200-of-machine.c for now?
(only the mpc5200 i2s driver uses it at the moment). It can always be
renamed if other folks
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 11:21:12AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Mark Brown
Incidentally, nobody ever really commented on my suggestion to do
something DMI-like
I'm feeling stupid; what does DMI stand for?
Desktop Management Interface, a standard BIOS
Mark Brown wrote:
Desktop Management Interface, a standard BIOS interface for getting
system data on x86 class hardware. Of particular interest here is the
fact that it contains various ID strings for things like motherboard and
chassis - on Linux drivers can be automatically loaded based on
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 01:40:24PM -0500, Timur Tabi wrote:
Mark Brown wrote:
Desktop Management Interface, a standard BIOS interface for getting
system data on x86 class hardware. Of particular interest here is the
fact that it contains various ID strings for things like motherboard and
Mark Brown wrote:
The only problem with this is that the OF probing code in the kernel binds
drivers to device tree nodes. So when a driver claims a node, no other
driver
will be probed with it.
So we can't have generic nodes that classify the motherboard and just let
everyone get
20 matches
Mail list logo
