[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       alsa-devel
Subject:    Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] ASoC: dt-bindings: Document dmic_sel-gpios optional prop for two DMICs case
From:       Mark Brown <broonie () kernel ! org>
Date:       2022-10-31 20:47:57
Message-ID: Y2A0fdwnHTqw/NDw () sirena ! org ! uk
[Download RAW message or body]


On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 01:43:43PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 12:56:16PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:

> > If we're going to do this we should also allow the bindings to label the
> > mics appropriately so that the control presented can reflect the actual
> > hardware.  It does feel like it might fit better to do this separately
> > to the DMIC driver as a mux between the DMIC and the DAI it's connected
> > to but equally with the way things are at the minute that feels like
> > it's probably disproportionate effort.

> Are there other needs for DAI muxes? We already have a mux binding, so 
> defining a DAI mux would work for any type of muxing control, not just 
> GPIO.

I suspect that anything that is more complex than a GPIO should be a
full fledged CODEC with the muxing internal to the CODEC and just
described that way.

["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]