[PATCH v2 1/6] ASoC: Allow device tree to specify a card's name

[Stephen Warren]

Rob Herring wrote at Wednesday, December 07, 2011 5:16 PM:
> On 12/07/2011 05:58 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 03:13:41PM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
> >> If a card's device was instantiated from device tree, and the device tree
> >> has a "user-visible-name" property, use that as the card's name.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren at nvidia.com>
> >> ---
> >> v2: New patch implementing new functionality
> >>
> >> Re: the binding documentation:
> >> * "SoC" here refers to the fact this is a binding oriented at System-on-
> >>   chip audio complexes, rather than having to do with "ASoC"; both names
> >>   were derived from the same root.
> >> * Do we need a compatible property for this "base class" binding at all?
> >>   I think it's a good idea, even though the code doesn't actually rely
> >>   on it.
> >> * Should the vendor field in the compatible property be "generic",
> >>   "linux", or absent? I've tried to make these bindings generic and
> >>   applicable to other OSs, so "linux," seems wrong.
> >
> > Just drop "generic," in my opinion. Rob? Grant? Segher?
> 
> I think the whole string should be dropped as it is too generic.

My idea was to mark the node as being capable of hosting the generic
user-visible-name and audio-routes properties, sort of like a C++ base
class. Is there no need to do that kind of thing?

-- 
nvpublic