From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754178Ab3HEQXu (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Aug 2013 12:23:50 -0400 Received: from cassiel.sirena.org.uk ([80.68.93.111]:50129 "EHLO cassiel.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753942Ab3HEQXs (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Aug 2013 12:23:48 -0400 Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 17:23:42 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Ashish Chavan Cc: lrg , alsa-devel , David Dajun Chen , linux-kernel , "kiran.padwal" Message-ID: <20130805162342.GS9858@sirena.org.uk> References: <20130708112613.GQ27646@sirena.org.uk> <1373542576.9286.101.camel@matrix> <20130717103651.GP22506@sirena.org.uk> <1374482594.13726.11.camel@matrix> <20130722100211.GP9858@sirena.org.uk> <1375110386.21326.6.camel@matrix> <20130729160157.GZ9858@sirena.org.uk> <1375689331.28910.5.camel@matrix> <20130805144201.GF9858@sirena.org.uk> <1375717898.29528.23.camel@matrix> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="eLzwy7sDwuTm2pX7" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1375717898.29528.23.camel@matrix> X-Cookie: You will be awarded some great honor. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 94.175.92.69 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH] ASoC: codecs: da9055: Update driver name to fix breakage due to pmic driver with same name X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:57:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on cassiel.sirena.org.uk) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --eLzwy7sDwuTm2pX7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 09:21:37PM +0530, Ashish Chavan wrote: > On Mon, 2013-08-05 at 15:42 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > No, I'm talking about the same thing I was talking about originally. > Thanks for confirming it. From our view point, we still feel that it's > not a good design which requires an additional MFD component even to > support a stand alone CODEC chip. The way we look at it is, there are so What makes you say that a MFD is required for a standalone CODEC? > many stand alone CODEC drivers in kernel and most of them are fine > without the MFD stub. We wish that our DA9055 CODEC driver should also > be treated in the same way. Just placing it in a different hardware > package (together with PMIC, in this case) shouldn't necessitate any > changes in software. e.g. whether any chip is produced as a BGA > component or through hole component, has no effect on it's software. You only need to write the glue once, it'd probably take you less time than writing these e-mails... Once you've handed the regmap to the ASoC core the code is identical. --eLzwy7sDwuTm2pX7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJR/9GLAAoJELSic+t+oim9OSgP/i0wQv6HLLKZ9dS5BeKMOee8 NKLNTje/vYpHaW1qJATgw95OMDZFl42A/dRdpSY4CxZcQtIOTozwSBVO9lHIJMoL LTsfuUIdFUUIlTvlHDWIObquRdqren8ktmkBrTsvVISrj+6Gm9M/MErMMKwiQw3a jLAHvh7Q0biugfkCHFiVimvoIpSNVhMmnpce0U03Ry19m3YanFOf5s9qASC6BthO oi+Xr77dBDqT22CN/b/GyZ82TqlV4mxEac8PNQ0q55t3igeI5L8eSKaWfx8PrXUH XV4ZU+oG0e1S+navzcBItln6nEEsWpXiIrALEOVvVEaZknzfP5VEloyeMAAmZezc yWhSnAAVjAgQ9j61OXy8ZzxWg96cqiTkY8MNMGNVrW+MStKnyGzXsm6NQ0RfoOBT h2W3tdD0GvYTnlf6gTJ7xOXi2yXPYh0DKNPx3KSDO6YpHieBpjCilMCE+upsTuLf UZr7N01V0bsHJYRxyr7qD+Y5HrVH9sujnYOYVxpINuMx9gGlf4E+5fNRwBvW6z7m C9fFpoHyA5hQ+pPmP8ozuEWJZ7ciC8Afpw0EcGA9R7f/E74omMMqu8VVDITzywAd 5UPYMmOdFuZz0JFwPLXVGuWiJf5RiD3XkEEGx8cl3A5KKKs90RW4YWXvE6PXx05E 4y0WySPVGtWclrcJ0N6q =zP8W -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --eLzwy7sDwuTm2pX7--