On Thu, Aug 04, 2022 at 09:21:37PM +0800, chunxu.li wrote: > On Thu, 2022-08-04 at 13:41 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 04, 2022 at 05:13:59PM +0800, Chunxu Li wrote: > > > + .board = "mediatek,mt8186", > > > + .sof_tplg_filename = "sof-mt8186.tplg", > > The mediatek,mt8186 compatible looks like a SoC compatible not a > > board > > compatible... > Our dts config as below: > kingler board: > compatible = "google,corsola", "google,kingler", "mediatek,mt8186"; > krabby board: > compatible = "google,corsola", "google,krabby", "mediatek,mt8186"; So the SoC is listed as a fallback for the board and things work out fine. > Which of the two approaches do you prefer? I think it would be clearer to keep what's being matched the same but rename the .board field to be .compatible, or possibly .system_compatible or something if it's unclear what's being matched. That'd be more normal for specifying a compatible string anyway.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
