On 05/08/2012 03:58 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 02:55:57PM +0300, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
+dmic_codec: dmic_codec@0 { /* generic DMIC codec */
- compatible = "generic,dmic-codec";
+};
Why is this called "dmic-codec" and not "dmic"? We probably need to have a think about this in the context of the handling of random on-board passive components in general - things like jacks and so on - is the most sensible thing to have a platform device for everything, or is that getting too noisy?
I don't think that we would need platform devices for most of the passive components you have listed. AFAIK (Liam can correct me if I'm wrong) the reason that we have this (dmic codec) is to be able to use the OMAP4+ DMIC in a card. In most cases the digital microphones are passive components connected to a codec and the codec is then interfaced with the CPU dai. With the OMAP4 DMIC we have the microphones connected directly to the CPU dai. In some sense the OMAP4+ DMIC block is a CPU dai and a codec at the same time. Or we can view it as we have PDM link betweent he CPU dai and the codec (dmic).
Not entirely sure if we will need to have dts section for the dmic, I can just create the platform device in the abe-twl6040 machine driver if the setup includes digital microphones.