It's really down to your objection to the use of 'struct driver'... For ASoC
support we only need the .name and .pm_ops, so there's really no possible
path forward otherwise.
It means that we cannot have a solution which is Intel specific into
core. If you has a standalone controller you do not need this.
A 'struct driver' is not Intel-specific, sorry.
Like I said, we have 3 options
Repeating the already discussed doesn't help. I have already told you the
constraint to work is not to add Intel specific change into core.
I have already said that expect the driver part I dont have objections
to rest of this series and am ready to merge
a) stay with platform devices for now. You will need to have a conversation
with Greg on this.
b) use a minimal sdw_master_device with a minimal 'struct driver' use.
c) use a more elaborate solution suggested in this patchset and yes that
means the Qualcomm driver would need to change a bit.
Pick one or suggest something that is implementable. The first version of
the patches was provided in October, the last RFC was provided on January
31, time's up. At the moment you are preventing ASoC integration from moving
forward.
In opensource review we go back and forth and we debate and come to a
common conclusion. Choosing a specific set of solutions and constraining
yourself to pick one does not help.
First off, the ask to move away from platform devices came from Greg.
Not me. All I did here was suggest solutions, one reviewed by Greg as
'sane' and 'nice work'. Greg essentially wrote the book on
devices/drivers so his review means I am not completely senile just yet.
You pushed back with two proposals that don't account for power
management and the driver name required for ASoC. That was on top on
another suggestion to use platform devices that was shot down by Greg
himself with language I can't quote here.
Please re-read my words: my ask was "Pick one or suggest something that
is implementable."
You don't pick one and don't suggest anything implementable either, so
there's really not much I can do, can I? I don't have a solution without
a 'struct driver', and you don't want it.
The only short-term path forward I see is to ask Greg to agree to keep
the platform devices for now.
I have only _one_ constraint no platform specific change in core. If that
is satisfied I will go with it. Sorry but this is non-negotiable for me.
How is a 'struct driver' platform specific?
Ask yourself, do you need this intrusive core change if you had this
exact same controller(s) but only as standalone one...
That would really not change anything. There would be some sort of ID
(PCI or something else) for the controller and multiple masters below.
The ACPI/DisCo spec does not account for masters so they would have to
be created by hand.
Again how is a 'struct driver' an 'intrusive change'?
