From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753278Ab1GGQij (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 7 Jul 2011 12:38:39 -0400
Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:41585 "EHLO mx2.suse.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1752237Ab1GGQih (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 7 Jul 2011 12:38:37 -0400
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2011 18:38:33 +0200
Message-ID: <s5h8vsa11x2.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
From: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
To: "Toshiharu Okada" <toshiharu-linux@dsn.okisemi.com>
Cc: <perex@perex.cz>, <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <qi.wang@intel.com>,
        <yong.y.wang@intel.com>, <joel.clark@intel.com>,
        <kok.howg.ewe@intel.com>, <tomoya-linux@dsn.okisemi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add SoundCard driver for OKI SEMICONDUCTOR ML7213 IOH
In-Reply-To: <A103B14DCBE64935815497A3464F512F@hacdom.okisemi.com>
References: <1309948067-9333-1-git-send-email-toshiharu-linux@dsn.okisemi.com>
	<s5hhb6z3byw.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
	<34CF59A8D33E40B6822498A23CD554E8@hacdom.okisemi.com>
	<s5hvcve1n40.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
	<A103B14DCBE64935815497A3464F512F@hacdom.okisemi.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.6 (Almost Unreal) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka)
 FLIM/1.14.9 (=?UTF-8?B?R29qxY0=?=) APEL/10.7 Emacs/23.2
 (x86_64-suse-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

At Thu, 7 Jul 2011 21:35:17 +0900,
Toshiharu Okada wrote:
> 
> Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2011 11:00:47 +0200
> From: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
> >>
> >> Therefore, I am not considering about ASoC.
> >> Do I need to fit this driver to an ASoC framework for an upstream?
> >
> >Yes, I guess this would be a better choice in your case.
> 
> Thank you for your comment.
> >From now on, We study about ASoC.
> If there are a document, a website, a driver, etc. which are referred, 
> please tell us.

Check Documentation/sound/alsa/soc/* files.

> Why is choosing ASoS better?
> Is it better to correspond to ASoC, when Audio Codec is unfixed?

It's not clear what you mean exactly as "unfixed", but in general, the
decision rather depends on the usage of the device.  If it's designed
for a use as a desktop PC component (such as a PCI card or
onboard-audio on PC), it'd make sense to implement as a stand-alone,
self-contained driver.

OTOH, if it's targeted mainly for embedded area, ASoC is the right
answer.  It's more modularized, and can be more flexibly configured in
the end.


Takashi