On Thu, 2020-08-13 at 20:11 +0200, Cezary Rojewski wrote: > On 2020-08-13 6:00 PM, Liam Girdwood wrote: > > On Wed, 2020-08-12 at 22:57 +0200, Cezary Rojewski wrote: > > > Implement support for Lynxpoint and Wildcat Point AudioDSP. Catpt > > > > > > solution deprecates existing sound/soc/intel/haswell which is > > > removed > > > in > > > > > > the following series. This cover-letter is followed by > > > 'Developer's > > > deep > > > > > > dive' message schedding light on catpt's key concepts and areas > > > > > > addressed. > > > > Whilst I applaud removing the old driver I do NOT support adding > > yet > > *another* Intel audio DSP driver. Our goal is to remove DSP drivers > > and > > unify under one codebase (and this was discussed in Lyon last year > > at > > the audio Miniconf). > > > > Please take all these good improvements and add them into the SOF > > driver. > > > > Please also remember that we are adding an IPC abstraction layer > > into > > the SOF driver so it can cope with multiple IPC versions. You are > > most > > welcome to help in this effort. > > > Presented catpt is created as a solution to existing problems > reported > by clients and users for WPT platforms. It is not "yet another" DSP > driver but an update to an existing one - due to high range of > problems > found when testing it, catpt came as a lower-cost solution and > /haswell/ > is being removed soon after. So, the status quo is maintained - > single > driver for LPT/WPT architecture. Its a new driver. Fix the old driver or (preferred) fix the SOF driver so we can remove the haswell driver and have one less DSP driver to maintain. > > Please don't use 'our goal' term, it's misplaced: it was agreed on > several occasions that older DSP platforms remain with closed > firmware > and are to be supported with existing DSP drivers. I'm not suggesting using SOF FW, but using the existing FW with the IPC abstraction. > SOF FW does not support BDW and instead is tasked with support of > newer > platforms. Neither SOF FW team nor Chrome support team agreed with > WPT > being moved out of closed firmware. Please, speak with management > first > before writing statements saying otherwise. To be clear - I'm saying fix the SOF driver to use the old FW (not the SOF FW). You know that we need IPC abstraction here (and for other platforms) > > I don't see your input for any of the patches. Internal heads-up has > been given. No review for either internal or upstream patchsets. > Afterall, you were the author of original /haswell/ and your input > could > have proved important in speeding the progress and yielding even > better > results to our clients. > Please don't mistake silence for my approval. I knew that updates were forthcoming but not a new driver. > As you've given no technical points for denying LPT/WPT improvements > and > your statement disagrees with management's decision, message shall > be > discarded and ignored for the rest of the upstream process. Further > discussion will be taken off this list. > > Mark, Takashi and others, > I'm sorry for this inconvenience, such actions do not represent One > Intel and Truth & Transparency which Intel is committed to stand by. > Seriously ? It's really simple for anyone to understand that introducing a new driver introduces new bugs. It's also very well understood that fixing or extending existing drivers is always the best path forwards over adding another new immature driver. I hope you understand that long term **convergence** is key for quality, maintainability and reduced effort, if not, I'm happy have a call. Thanks Liam
