Re: [RFC 1/5] soundwire: bus_type: add sdw_master_device support

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 28-04-20, 08:55, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 12:19:51PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > On 28-04-20, 08:37, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 10:01:44AM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > > > > That is not true for everyone, it is only true for Intel, pls call that
> > > > > > out as well...
> > > > > 
> > > > > Why is it not true for everyone?  How else do you get the pm stuff back
> > > > > to your hardware?
> > > > 
> > > > The rest of the world would do using the real controller device. For
> > > > example the soundwire controller on Qualcomm devices is enumerated as a
> > > > DT device and is using these...
> > > > 
> > > > If Intel had a standalone controller or enumerated as individual
> > > > functions, it would have been a PCI device and would manage as such
> > > 
> > > If it is not a standalone controller, what exactly is it?  I thought it
> > > was an acpi device, am I mistaken?
> > > 
> > > What is the device that the proper soundwire controller driver binds to
> > > on an Intel-based system?
> > 
> > The HDA controller which is a PCI device. The device represent HDA
> > function, DSP and Soundwire controller instances (yes it is typically
> > more than one instance)
> 
> Then those "instances" should be split up into individual devices that a
> driver can bind to.  See the work happening on the "virtual" bus for
> examples of how that can be done.

Yes removing platform devices is the goal for Intel now :) Pierre & Bard
have been diligently trying to solve this.

Only difference is the means to end goal. I am not convinced that this
should be in soundwire subsystem.

Looks like folks are trying to review and port to use this bus. Makes
sense to me..
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/c5197d2f-3840-d304-6b09-d334cae81294@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/

> A platform device better not be being used here, I'm afraid to look at
> the code now...

Well if the plan for 'virtual-bus' goes well, it should be  a simple
replacement of platform->virtual for Intel driver. Rest of the driver
should not be impacted :)

Thanks
-- 
~Vinod



[Index of Archives]     [ALSA User]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Pulse Audio]     [Kernel Archive]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Photo Sharing]     [Linux Sound]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux