On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 09:22:53PM -0700, Dylan Reid wrote:
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 1:14 PM, Mark Brown broonie@kernel.org wrote:
The only things that concerned me particularly were the name (which I did agree on once you mentioned it) and the use of a bitmask to describe what's being reported but it's hard to think of anything much better than that.
Is just "audio-jack" too generic? There are a lot of audio jacks that wouldn't be described by this binding, such as those reported by the 227e or 5650. The original goal here was to describe a jack that has
I think it's fine - I think we can use this as a jack object and have other things reference it to supply additional detection mechanism. Lars' point about jacks not just being for audio is a valid one, though.
one or more gpios, each representing a particular type of device being attached. This doesn't overlap with the binding for a jack that is handled by a headset detect chip. Does this seem like the right goal, or is there a benefit to having an "audio-jack" binding that tries to cover all different types of jacks?
So like I say I was thinking that either the jack object has a list of detection method phandles which point to other devices or the other devices point at the jack object.