On 10/03/2021 18:37, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: > >>>> Build time dependencies aren't going to help anything, arm64 (and to my >>>> understanding some future x86 systems, LynxPoint IIRC) supports both DT >>>> and ACPI and so you have kernels built with support for both. >> >>> well, that's what I suggested initially: >>> if (is_of_node(card->dev->fwnode)) >> >>> I used the of_node test as a proxy for 'no DMI' since I am not aware >>> of any >>> means to detect if DMI is enabled at run-time. >> >> Can we not fix the DMI code so it lets us check dmi_available either >> directly or with an accessor? I don't understand why all the proposals >> are dancing around local bodges here. > > something like this then (compile-tested only)? > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c b/drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c > index d51ca0428bb8..f191a1f901ac 100644 > --- a/drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c > +++ b/drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c > @@ -166,6 +166,7 @@ static int __init dmi_checksum(const u8 *buf, u8 len) > static const char *dmi_ident[DMI_STRING_MAX]; > static LIST_HEAD(dmi_devices); > int dmi_available; > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dmi_available); > > /* > * Save a DMI string > diff --git a/sound/soc/soc-core.c b/sound/soc/soc-core.c > index 16ba54eb8164..c7e4600b2dd4 100644 > --- a/sound/soc/soc-core.c > +++ b/sound/soc/soc-core.c > @@ -1574,7 +1574,7 @@ int snd_soc_set_dmi_name(struct snd_soc_card > *card, const char *flavour) > if (card->long_name) > return 0; /* long name already set by driver or from DMI */ > > - if (!is_acpi_device_node(card->dev->fwnode)) > + if (!dmi_available) > return 0; > > /* make up dmi long name as: vendor-product-version-board */ Sounds good to me. I would have done the same if I had known that the current solution would have caused this regression. Cheers Jon -- nvpublic
