On 10/24/07, Timur Tabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jon Smirl wrote: > > > I see your point about putting the child node onto the control bus. > > ac97 is both a control and data bus. For the i2s case the child should > > go onto the i2c bus. > > I know AC97 is *also* a control bus, but treating I2S and AC97 differently is > bad, IMHO. If you're going to put the child node in the AC97 node, you should > also put it in the I2S node.
They *are* different. The choice you're making is whether or not you keep them similar in the control path or the data path; but you still have to choose. > > The 8610 has an SSI that can operate as either AC97 or I2S. If I want to > switch > from AC97 to I2S, I should not have to move the child node out of the AC97 > node. > I should instead just add an I2C node and point to it. But you need a different codec node regardless. The board/system will in the vast majority of cases designed to only use AC97 or only use I2S. It's not moving a node. It's deleting an ac97 codec node and adding an i2s codec node. Besides; correctness is more important that how many device tree changes need to be made to go from one board design to another. Cheers, g. -- Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies Ltd. [EMAIL PROTECTED] (403) 399-0195 _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
