On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 11:44:16AM -0500, Timur Tabi wrote: ...
Ok, fair enough. I understand that my binding has no way of specifying board-specific properties, or anything that isn't directly related to the SSI, codec, or DMA controller.
However, I don't like the way this is being represented as a PowerPC vs. ARM issue, because that's just not correct. It's an "old binding" vs "new binding" issue. For example:
- /*
* In case of imx, the machine driver uses new binding which does* not require SSI driver to trigger machine driver's probe, but* the pcm device needs to be registered here.*/- if (ssi_private->ssi_on_imx) {
This could probably change to check whether property codec-handle is present under SSI node to decide if it runs with "old binding" or "new binding".
ssi_private->imx_pcm_pdev =platform_device_register_simple("imx-pcm-audio",
This is still IMX vs. PowerPC thing rather than "old binding" vs. "new binding" one.
This prohibits me from using the new binding on any future PowerPC parts, because it clearly says "iMX" on everything.
I think we can change it later when the future PowerPC parts come to use the new binding. In any case, I do not see this is an issue that should block the whole series.