Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 10 Jun 2020 11:29:20 +0100 | From | Mark Brown <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: tas2562: Add firmware support for tas2563 |
| |
On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 02:20:29PM -0500, Dan Murphy wrote: > On 6/9/20 1:47 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > That's really not very idiomatic for how Linux does stuff and seems to > > pretty much guarantee issues with hotplugging controls and ordering - > > you'd need special userspace to start up even if it was just a really > > simple DSP config doing only speaker correction or something. I'm not > > sure what the advantage would be - what problem is this solving over > > static names?
> IMO having a static name is the problem. It is an inflexible design. > Besides the firmware-name property seems to be used in other drivers to > declare firmwares for the boards.
> But if no one is complaining or submitting patches within the codecs to be > more flexible with firmware then I can just hard code the name like other > drivers do.
I'm not *completely* opposed to having the ability to suggest a name in firmware, the big problem is making use of the DSP completely dependent on having a DT property or doing some non-standard dance in userspace. [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |