Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] ASoC: meson: implement link-name optional property in meson card utils

[Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Apr 08, 2024 at 09:40:41PM +0300, Dmitry Rokosov wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2024 at 08:15:54PM +0200, Jerome Brunet wrote:

> > Userspace pcm, otherwise known as DPCM frontend, are merely that:
> > frontends. What they do is entirely defined by the routing defined by
> > the userspace (amixer and friends)

> > So naming the interface in DT (the FW describing the HW) after what the
> > the userspace SW could possibly set later on is wrong.

> > Bottom line: I have mixed feeling about this change. It could allow all
> > sort of bad names to be set.

> > The only way it could make sense HW wise is if the only allowed names
> > where (fr|to)ddr_[abcd], which could help maps the interface and the
> > kcontrol.

> The link-name is an optional parameter. Yes, you are right, it can be
> routed in a way that it no longer functions as a speaker in most cases.
> However, if you plan to use your board's dt for common purposes, you
> should not change the common names for DAI links. But if you know that
> you have a static setup for speakers, microphones, loopback, or other
> references (you 100% know it, because you are HW developer of this
> board), why not help the user understand the PCM device assignment in
> the easiest way?

I would expect that the place to fix names based on the userspace
configuration is in whatever userspace is using to define it's
configurations, like a UCM config.

> Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the DT board developer to define
> specific DAIs and name them based on their own knowledge about HW and
> understanding of the board's usage purposes.

DT seems like the wrong abstraction layer here.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature