Subject: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: pxa: ssp: provide platform_device_id for PXA3xx

From: [email-masked] (Daniel Mack)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 10:32:42 +0200

On 08/15/2014 10:33 AM, Haojian Zhuang wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Daniel Mack <[email-masked]> wrote:
>> Hi Haojian,
>>
>> On 08/14/2014 04:08 AM, Haojian Zhuang wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 3:59 AM, Daniel Mack <[email-masked]> wrote:
>>>> Provide an explicit match string for PXA3xx SSP ports.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Mack <[email-masked]>
>>>> ---
>>>>  arch/arm/plat-pxa/ssp.c | 1 +
>>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-pxa/ssp.c b/arch/arm/plat-pxa/ssp.c
>>>> index 3ea0290..1f5ee17 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm/plat-pxa/ssp.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/plat-pxa/ssp.c
>>>> @@ -258,6 +258,7 @@ static const struct platform_device_id ssp_id_table[] = {
>>>>         { "pxa25x-ssp",         PXA25x_SSP },
>>>>         { "pxa25x-nssp",        PXA25x_NSSP },
>>>>         { "pxa27x-ssp",         PXA27x_SSP },
>>>> +       { "pxa3xx-ssp",         PXA3xx_SSP },
>>>>         { "pxa168-ssp",         PXA168_SSP },
>>>>         { "pxa910-ssp",         PXA910_SSP },
>>>>         { },
>>>> --
>>
>>> I don't agree on this. SSP1,SSP2,SSP3 on pxa3xx are same with pxa27x.
>>> So we reuse the name.
>>> For the new SSP4, we create pxa3xx_device_ssp4.
>>
>> Well, the problem is that the code in sound/soc/pxa/pxa-ssp.c is full of
>> checks like "ssp->type == PXA3xx_SSP", but unless the devices are
>> instantiated via DT, this value is never set appropriately, not even for
>> ssp4.
>>
>> That's a regression caused by 972a55b62 ("ASoC: fix pxa-ssp compiling
>> issue under mach-mmp"), btw, that added the PXA3xx_SSP enum value but
>> forgot to make sure it is actually used.
>>
>> Hence, this commit could even get a stable tag for 3.5+.
>>
>>
> Yes, you're right. We should append this string.

Would this go through your tree or will Arnd or Eric pick those patches?

Thanks,
Daniel