On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 09:12:57AM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: > On 4/8/21 8:18 AM, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > I guess the question here is how to identify the proper profile for a > > certain platform and how to get it passed over the whole system. > > Theoretically, the rename of the card name or mixer name strings could > > be done in user-space side, too (e.g. mapping in alsa-lib or > > whatever), so I don't think it mandatory to make them variable via > > sysfs, if it's meant only for the consistency reason. > > Didn't we discuss in the past about the possibility to store the > > profile name in the card component string? > Because of OEM or user customization, we will have multiple versions of > firmware and topology that will have to be enabled in specific setting. The > last thing we want is hard-coded rules in the kernel on which firmware > customization to use for which platform. ... > If the users wipes the OEM image and installs a standard distribution on the > same device, they would by default use the firmware generated from the SOF > main branch, without any differentiation and 3rd party IP. > So the point is: how do we expose this information to UCM? In the machine > driver where the card is created? There is zero information on what the > firmware/topology does. The information can only be extracted when the > topology is loaded when probing the SOF component driver. So what we're looking for here is a mechanism to tell userspace what firmware has been loaded? > > I don't think the point was to rewrite the controls but make sure that UCM > is aware that the card definition was changed by a different selection of > firmware. > > Jaroslav, please correct me if I misunderstood the intent of this patch!
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
