On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 01:52:00PM -0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
I'd originally made this property specific to the Tegra+WM8903 machine driver, and you'd asked me to make it generic. Is there room to use the binding above for the Tegra+WM8903 machine driver only, in order to get the driver converted to DT, then define/implement something completely generic to replace it, i.e. the stuff below?
I was asking for the code to be generic, not the binding itself. If the code could for example take a property name as an argument that'd allow other bindings to use the same code without having to have a generic binding which has bits which depend strongly on some Linux specific machine driver.
This would be a fair bit of work to implement, but what are your thoughts on the binding example below? It's very strongly based on ASoC, but since that's so strongly based on the HW, I think you can consider it a pure HW model rather than something derived from the way the driver works.
It's starting to get an idiomatic way of representing the external nodes, HDA is probably a good source of inspiration :) We do need to have a think about the jacks, though - simple ones are fine but multifinction is more fun.