Re: [Patch V7 02/10] ASoC: qcom: Document LPASS CPU bindings

[Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 941 bytes --]

On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 04:06:48PM -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:

As previously and repeatedly requested please fix your mailer to word
wrap within paragraphs, not doing this makes your mails harder to read
and reply to.  I've reflowed your message for legibility.

> > The audio DSP is, in fact, contained within the audio subsystem.  The
> > representation of that relationship in the DT, I believe, would be a subnode.
> > OTOH, if there is a strong sentiment towards using a phandle, that would be
> > fine with me.

> Just depends on how we communicate with the DSP.  If its mostly via
> MMIO access than a sub node makes sense.  If its via some other
> RPC/communication mechanism than possibly a phandle.  Trying to
> understand a bit more to than see what I’d recommend.

It should be a phandle, while these things are all part of the same
logical function in the CPU they're separate IPs and there may be many
DAIs.

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]