On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 10:23:43AM +0300, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
Mark Brown broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com wrote:
Best not in the header; these are not things individual drivers should be worrying their pretty little heads about. If they should be used by individual drivers then we need better names than just _.
Yeah, I picked up _ prefix so that name indicates that these functions are more like for internal use and drivers should use them only exceptionally. What I'm thinking if we can rid of them completely.
I figured.
From your commit 26b01cc it looks like there's a work in progress to support DAI-less codecs/amplifiers. If that would be possible then there is no need to register controls from other drivers in machine DAI
DAIless devices should work already.
init. Well, CPU DAI controls are possible but they don't need a prefix I think.
There might be an issue disambiguating against collisions with other drivers in the system, I guess.
I don't see how a DAI link can ever be used to configure prefix names - there's just not any real association between DAI links and controls, and as soon as you hit mixing any that does exist gets lost. Probably a table of CODEC to prefix mappings would be better.
Sorry, I didn't emphasis this well enough that this hack was temporary just after your comment to first version and it got finally removed in yesterday's version :-)
Yeah, I was writing my reply as you sent that.
This one is a bit more fun. For this to work properly we need to consider what happens with the cross-device links in the DAI maps which means we need to able to cope with separate prefixes for the source and the sink.
Prefixing is not problem I think since we can specify them in machine's audio map (like two mono amplifiers registered to 1st codec are prefixed below) but how to link DAPMs of two codec together?
We'll be fine just using the prefixed name in the machine drivers I think and not advertising the prefix-adding route add function.