Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] ASoC: fsl: Add S/PDIF machine driver
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Date: 2013-08-19 09:25:02
Also in:
alsa-devel, linuxppc-dev
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 09:35:22AM +0100, Nicolin Chen wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
This patch implements a device-tree-only machine driver for Freescale i.MX series Soc. It works with spdif_transmitter/spdif_receiver and fsl_spdif.c drivers. Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <redacted> --- .../devicetree/bindings/sound/imx-audio-spdif.txt | 29 +++++ sound/soc/fsl/Kconfig | 11 ++ sound/soc/fsl/Makefile | 2 + sound/soc/fsl/imx-spdif.c | 134 ++++++++++++++++++++ 4 files changed, 176 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/imx-audio-spdif.txt create mode 100644 sound/soc/fsl/imx-spdif.cdiff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/imx-audio-spdif.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/imx-audio-spdif.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..9a3fa26 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/imx-audio-spdif.txt@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +Freescale i.MX audio complex with S/PDIF transceiver + +Required properties: + + - compatible : "fsl,imx-audio-spdif" + + - model : The user-visible name of this sound complex
Is this used semantically, or is it a completely arbitrary string? In either case I don't see why the compatible string doesn't give the driver enough to have a sensible value. I'm confused as to why we need this. The phrase "user-visible" in a device description seems very odd.
+ + - spdif-controller : The phandle of the i.MX S/PDIF controller + + +Optional properties: + + - spdif-transmitter : The phandle of the spdif-transmitter dummy codec + + - spdif-receiver : The phandle of the spdif-receiver dummy codec + +* Note: At least one of these two properties should be set in the DT binding.
Are all four units (comlpex,controller,transmitter,receiver) really separate blocks? Thanks, Mark.