On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 11:48:40AM +0530, Mukunda,Vijendar wrote: > On 10/11/21 11:19 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > >> + pdevinfo[3].name = "acp5x_nu8821_cs35l41_mach"; > > This appears to unconditionally assume that any machine with this > > hardware is going to have exactly the same CODEC/amp combination - that > > seems like it's going to go badly at some point. Shouldn't there be > > some other check that we're instantiating the right machine driver? > we will make the platform device as generic one something like "acp5x_mach". > Currently we have only one target platform with above codec combinations > for this APU series. > When we get new codecs combinations to support, we will address it in > machine driver by adding DMI checks for distinguishing codec combinations. If that's the case then this machine driver that's being instantiated is poorly named, and I expect you're going to get issues with assuming a default here and trying to instantiate this machine on unsuitable hardware. It'd be better to at least put a bit of the framework in now and positively indentify systems that can run this machine driver. It really would be good if ACPI system vendors were to adopt a more standards based approach to platform enumeration, this really isn't good. Something more standards based like DT has would be much more scalable.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
