Jon Smirl wrote:
> I'm fixing up the asoc v2 code to use MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE() and the
> real kernel aliasing/insmod system. Half of why we are having trouble
> is because asoc isn't using this mechanism. I've posted patches fixing
> i2c to use the same mechanism. I don't have the asoc ones ready
On 11/26/07, Timur Tabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Gibson wrote:
>
> > 1) We have a "universal" device-tree-based fabric driver which
> > parses all the above-described interconnection information in the
> > device tree and handles any situation. Cool, but probably a lot of
> > work
David Gibson wrote:
> 1) We have a "universal" device-tree-based fabric driver which
> parses all the above-described interconnection information in the
> device tree and handles any situation. Cool, but probably a lot of
> work and fiddly to get right.
Definitely a lot of work. I suggest
On Mon, Nov 19, 2007 at 04:58:44PM +, Matt Sealey wrote:
> Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >> And I forgot the rant you guys usually get - for god's sake, why isn't
> >> anyone using the "model" property?
> >
> > Probably because it isn't useful all that often.
> >
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
> >>
On Mon, Nov 19, 2007 at 04:31:57PM +, Matt Sealey wrote:
> David Gibson wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 18, 2007 at 11:31:13PM +, Matt Sealey wrote:
> >
> > Gah! For the benefit of others on this list who may be misled.
> >
> > *Neither* of you correctly understands the device tree, what I've see
On Mon, Nov 19, 2007 at 12:28:02PM -0700, Grant Likely wrote:
> On 11/19/07, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 11/19/07, Grant Likely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > You might be stuck with using either a platform_device or an
> > > of_platform_device as a stepping stone to creating the
On Mon, Nov 19, 2007 at 01:48:40PM +0100, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > Matt, the various properties you list do not mean what you think they
> > mean.
> >
> > name - should be named according to the generic names convention.
> > It's pretty much arbitrary, meant for human readability of the device
On 11/19/07, Timur Tabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jon Smirl wrote:
>
> > Now how do I pick which fabric driver to initialize?
>
> I'm doing it via a Kconfig option. For ASoC V1, I think that's the only way
> that works.
I believe that is your only choice on v1. V1 is not set up to
correctly ha
Jon Smirl wrote:
> Now how do I pick which fabric driver to initialize?
I'm doing it via a Kconfig option. For ASoC V1, I think that's the only way
that works.
--
Timur Tabi
Linux Kernel Developer @ Freescale
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-
On 11/19/07, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/19/07, Grant Likely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You might be stuck with using either a platform_device or an
> > of_platform_device as a stepping stone to creating the device on the
> > ALSA fabric driver.
>
> I also concluded that I need
On 11/19/07, Grant Likely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/19/07, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 11/19/07, Grant Likely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 11/19/07, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On 11/19/07, Grant Likely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > On 11/19/0
On 11/19/07, Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2007 at 04:31:57PM +, Matt Sealey wrote:
> > I never said drivers should depend on it but why do you want to name
> > an i2s bus as "i2s" or the i2c bus as "i2c"?
>
> Because that's what they are?
>
> > There are far, far more
On Mon, Nov 19, 2007 at 04:31:57PM +, Matt Sealey wrote:
> I never said drivers should depend on it but why do you want to name
> an i2s bus as "i2s" or the i2c bus as "i2c"?
Because that's what they are?
> There are far, far more descriptive names that can be used. i2s is
> basically audio,
On 11/19/07, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/19/07, Grant Likely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 11/19/07, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 11/19/07, Grant Likely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On 11/19/07, Timur Tabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > Jon Smirl wr
Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>> And I forgot the rant you guys usually get - for god's sake, why isn't
>> anyone using the "model" property?
>
> Probably because it isn't useful all that often.
>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
>> \\ this is our magic audio fabric
>> device_type = "digispeaker,flinge
On 11/19/07, Timur Tabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Grant Likely wrote:
>
> > You probably mean "don't use the of_platform bus to load the fabric
> > driver".
>
> Yes, that is what I meant.
>
> > He still needs to use the data in the device tree to decide
> > what fabric drivers to use.
>
> I'm no
On 11/19/07, Timur Tabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Grant Likely wrote:
>
> > You probably mean "don't use the of_platform bus to load the fabric
> > driver".
>
> Yes, that is what I meant.
>
> > He still needs to use the data in the device tree to decide
> > what fabric drivers to use.
>
> I'm no
On 11/19/07, Grant Likely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/19/07, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 11/19/07, Grant Likely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 11/19/07, Timur Tabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Jon Smirl wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In the ALSA SOC model the i2s, codec
Grant Likely wrote:
> You probably mean "don't use the of_platform bus to load the fabric
> driver".
Yes, that is what I meant.
> He still needs to use the data in the device tree to decide
> what fabric drivers to use.
I'm not sure about that. The fabric driver is tied to the platform itsel
On 11/19/07, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/19/07, Grant Likely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 11/19/07, Timur Tabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Jon Smirl wrote:
> > >
> > > > In the ALSA SOC model the i2s, codec and ac97 drivers are all generic.
> > > > A fabric driver tells s
David Gibson wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2007 at 11:31:13PM +, Matt Sealey wrote:
>
> Gah! For the benefit of others on this list who may be misled.
>
> *Neither* of you correctly understands the device tree, what I've seen
> of *both* your suggested approaches is crap.
>
> The device tree des
On 11/19/07, Grant Likely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/19/07, Timur Tabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Jon Smirl wrote:
> >
> > > In the ALSA SOC model the i2s, codec and ac97 drivers are all generic.
> > > A fabric driver tells specifically how a generic codec is wired into
> > > the board.
On 11/19/07, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/19/07, Timur Tabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Jon Smirl wrote:
> >
> > > In the ALSA SOC model the i2s, codec and ac97 drivers are all generic.
> > > A fabric driver tells specifically how a generic codec is wired into
> > > the board. Wh
On 11/19/07, Timur Tabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jon Smirl wrote:
>
> > In the ALSA SOC model the i2s, codec and ac97 drivers are all generic.
> > A fabric driver tells specifically how a generic codec is wired into
> > the board. What I haven't been able figure out is how to load the
> > right
On 11/19/07, Timur Tabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt Sealey wrote:
> > Jon Smirl wrote:
> >> The codec-fabric node was just being used to trigger the loading of
> >> the platform specific driver.
> >
> > Just remember one thing.
> >
> > 1) the term "fabric" when coined for audio drivers is a n
On 11/19/07, Timur Tabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jon Smirl wrote:
>
> > In the ALSA SOC model the i2s, codec and ac97 drivers are all generic.
> > A fabric driver tells specifically how a generic codec is wired into
> > the board. What I haven't been able figure out is how to load the
> > right
So, like, the other day Timur Tabi mumbled:
>
> If I weren't on vacation this week, I'd email you my code. It's almost done
> and it demonstrates what I'm thinking.
Are the margins of this paper too small for your proof?
jdl
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing
Jon Smirl wrote:
> In the ALSA SOC model the i2s, codec and ac97 drivers are all generic.
> A fabric driver tells specifically how a generic codec is wired into
> the board. What I haven't been able figure out is how to load the
> right fabric driver.
Do not use the device tree to load the fabric
Matt Sealey wrote:
> Jon Smirl wrote:
>> The codec-fabric node was just being used to trigger the loading of
>> the platform specific driver.
>
> Just remember one thing.
>
> 1) the term "fabric" when coined for audio drivers is a new, ALSA SoC
> specific term. It isn't relevant for anything but
> Matt, the various properties you list do not mean what you think they
> mean.
>
> name - should be named according to the generic names convention.
> It's pretty much arbitrary, meant for human readability of the device
> tree. Drivers should not depend on it (some do, historically, but new
> dr
> And I forgot the rant you guys usually get - for god's sake, why isn't
> anyone using the "model" property?
Probably because it isn't useful all that often.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
> \\ this is our magic audio fabric
> device_type = "digispeaker,flinger";
This is wrong in so many way
On 11/18/07, David Gibson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2007 at 11:31:13PM +, Matt Sealey wrote:
> > Matt Sealey wrote:
> > > Jon Smirl wrote:
> > >
> > > If you require the codec to be subservient to some "fabric" then I
> > > suggest you make a "sound" node with a compatible en
On Sun, Nov 18, 2007 at 11:31:13PM +, Matt Sealey wrote:
> Matt Sealey wrote:
> > Jon Smirl wrote:
> >
> > If you require the codec to be subservient to some "fabric" then I
> > suggest you make a "sound" node with a compatible entry which is
> > defined as something specific to your board (dig
On 11/18/07, Matt Sealey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd suggest something like this:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
> \\ this is our magic audio fabric
> device_type = "digispeaker,flinger";
>
> \\ it's actually just an i2s pcm codec
> compatible = "mpc5200-psc-i2s";
>
>
Matt Sealey wrote:
> Jon Smirl wrote:
>
> If you require the codec to be subservient to some "fabric" then I
> suggest you make a "sound" node with a compatible entry which is
> defined as something specific to your board (digispeaker,audio) and
> let your driver pick that up and then switch on the
Jon Smirl wrote:
>
> The codec-fabric node was just being used to trigger the loading of
> the platform specific driver.
Just remember one thing.
1) the term "fabric" when coined for audio drivers is a new, ALSA SoC
specific term. It isn't relevant for anything but ALSA SoC drivers.
2) this dev
On 11/18/07, Segher Boessenkool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > David Gibson
> > made a proposal that a fabric node wrap the codec node. That doesn't
> > work very well with the i2c bus where the bus code is walking down the
> > nodes and triggering the instantiation of the i2c drivers.
>
> Yeah, do
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] { // PSC2
> compatible = "mpc5200b-psc-ac97","mpc5200-psc-ac97";
> cell-index = <1>;
> reg = <2200 100>;
> interrupts = <2 2 0>;
> interrupt-pa
38 matches
Mail list logo
