25 Apr
2017
25 Apr
'17
5:04 a.m.
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 08:32:14PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
On Mon, 24 Apr 2017 18:27:38 +0200,
So we should add the remaining one byt-max98090.c as Takashi fixed byt-rt5640.c one. I will send the patch for this one.
Or maybe we should replace these definitions with some macro to expand to the mostly same contents? The difference is just a few callback functions, basically.
And while at it, I cant help but wonder but if we can do better and mark it in platform driver thus avoiding it replication in machines. Afterall the atomic trigger is a platform property.
Thanks
--
~Vinod