On Tue, 4 Feb 2014 18:12:13 +0000 Mark Brown <broonie at kernel.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 01, 2014 at 05:48:49PM +0100, Jean-Francois Moine wrote: > > > + - compatible: must be "nxp,tda998x-codec". > > It's not clear to me why there's a separate compatible here - as far as > I can see this can only appear as part of one of these devices and > there's no addressing or other information that'd account for chip > variation so I'd not expect to need to bind this independently of the > parent. If there is no 'compatible', the CODEC module is not loaded, and, when the module is in the core, no CODEC device can be created from the DT. -- Ken ar c'henta? | ** Breizh ha Linux atav! ** Jef | http://moinejf.free.fr/
