From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: "Li.Xiubo@freescale.com" <Li.Xiubo@freescale.com>
Cc: "lgirdwood@gmail.com" <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
"alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl-sai: Add device tree nodes and its availiable check
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 16:10:39 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140113161039.GA29039@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8ea36054cbe745cf9ce5c5d4a786f9ff@BY2PR03MB505.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1118 bytes --]
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 06:15:24AM +0000, Li.Xiubo@freescale.com wrote:
> > I would expect the of_device_is_available() check to be done by the
> > driver core rather than by individual drivers - every single driver
> > should have that check. Is this not happening? The check for np is OK
> > though.
> Yes, I hasn't found the core driver does that for now...
Are you sure, we actively use the ability to mark devices as unavailable
on some systems?
> And IMO this is needed since the SAI driver is only base dts. And maybe
> the device is not presently operational, but it might become operational
> in the future (for example, something is not plugged in, or switched off).
> Or A serious error was detected in the device, and it is unlikely to become
> operational without repair...
I'm sorry but I don't understand what you're saying here at all. These
are all things that might happen but I don't see the connection between
them and the benefits of implementing things in the core - surely the
more functionality there is the more useful it's going to be to factor
all the code out into the driver core?
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-13 16:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-10 2:05 Xiubo Li
2014-01-10 11:09 ` Mark Brown
2014-01-13 6:15 ` Li.Xiubo
2014-01-13 16:10 ` Mark Brown [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140113161039.GA29039@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=Li.Xiubo@freescale.com \
--cc=alsa-devel@alsa-project.org \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®