On 08/20/2013 08:18 PM, Nicolin Chen wrote:
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 11:28:10PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
quoted
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 01:53:49PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
quoted
On 08/20/2013 01:07 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
quoted
quoted
The point is that it might turn into a more correct binding
depending on what the S/PDIF device actually is.
quoted
There's *never* an object on the board called a "dummy codec".
Oh, is that what you're talking about? Yes, that makes sense. I had
been responding to the comments about the transceivers.
I'll remove the 'dummy' words in the next version from the binding doc.
I think the word "CODEC" is also problematic in this context, since
whatever is connector to the S/PDIF output path may not be a CODEC.
That's why I suggested some more generic property names that IIRC
concentrated on enabling rx/tx rather than indicating what was actually
connected to the S/PDIF controller.