Il 28/07/23 11:08, Maso Huang ha scritto:
Add support for mt7986 board with wm8960.
Signed-off-by: Maso Huang <maso.huang@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
sound/soc/mediatek/Kconfig | 10 ++
sound/soc/mediatek/mt7986/Makefile | 1 +
sound/soc/mediatek/mt7986/mt7986-wm8960.c | 184 ++++++++++++++++++++++
3 files changed, 195 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 sound/soc/mediatek/mt7986/mt7986-wm8960.c
diff --git a/sound/soc/mediatek/Kconfig b/sound/soc/mediatek/Kconfig
index 558827755a8d..8d1bc8814486 100644
--- a/sound/soc/mediatek/Kconfig
+++ b/sound/soc/mediatek/Kconfig
@@ -64,6 +64,16 @@ config SND_SOC_MT7986
Select Y if you have such device.
If unsure select "N".
+config SND_SOC_MT7986_WM8960
+ tristate "ASoc Audio driver for MT7986 with WM8960 codec"
+ depends on SND_SOC_MT7986 && I2C
+ select SND_SOC_WM8960
+ help
+ This adds support for ASoC machine driver for MediaTek MT7986
+ boards with the WM8960 codecs.
+ Select Y if you have such device.
+ If unsure select "N".
+
config SND_SOC_MT8173
tristate "ASoC support for Mediatek MT8173 chip"
depends on ARCH_MEDIATEK
diff --git a/sound/soc/mediatek/mt7986/Makefile b/sound/soc/mediatek/mt7986/Makefile
index de0742a67cae..fc4c82559b29 100644
--- a/sound/soc/mediatek/mt7986/Makefile
+++ b/sound/soc/mediatek/mt7986/Makefile
@@ -6,3 +6,4 @@ snd-soc-mt7986-afe-objs := \
mt7986-dai-etdm.o
obj-$(CONFIG_SND_SOC_MT7986) += snd-soc-mt7986-afe.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_SND_SOC_MT7986_WM8960) += mt7986-wm8960.o
diff --git a/sound/soc/mediatek/mt7986/mt7986-wm8960.c b/sound/soc/mediatek/mt7986/mt7986-wm8960.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..a880fcb8662e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/sound/soc/mediatek/mt7986/mt7986-wm8960.c
..snip..
+static int mt7986_wm8960_machine_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+ struct snd_soc_card *card = &mt7986_wm8960_card;
+ struct snd_soc_dai_link *dai_link;
+ struct mt7986_wm8960_priv *priv;
+ int ret, i;
+
+ priv = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*priv), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!priv)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ priv->platform_node = of_parse_phandle(pdev->dev.of_node,
+ "mediatek,platform", 0);
+ if (!priv->platform_node) {
+ dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Property 'platform' missing or invalid\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ for_each_card_prelinks(card, i, dai_link) {
+ if (dai_link->platforms->name)
+ continue;
+ dai_link->platforms->of_node = priv->platform_node;
+ }
+
+ card->dev = &pdev->dev;
+
+ priv->codec_node = of_parse_phandle(pdev->dev.of_node,
+ "mediatek,audio-codec", 0);
+ if (!priv->codec_node) {
+ dev_err(&pdev->dev,
+ "Property 'audio-codec' missing or invalid\n");
+ of_node_put(priv->platform_node);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ for_each_card_prelinks(card, i, dai_link) {
+ if (dai_link->codecs->name)
+ continue;
+ dai_link->codecs->of_node = priv->codec_node;
+ }
+
+ ret = snd_soc_of_parse_audio_routing(card, "audio-routing");
+ if (ret) {
+ dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to parse audio-routing: %d\n", ret);
+ goto err_of_node_put;
+ }
+
+ ret = devm_snd_soc_register_card(&pdev->dev, card);
+ if (ret) {
+ dev_err(&pdev->dev, "%s snd_soc_register_card fail %d\n",
+ __func__, ret);
+ goto err_of_node_put;
+ }
+
+err_of_node_put:
+ of_node_put(priv->codec_node);
+ of_node_put(priv->platform_node);
+ return ret;
+}
+
+static void mt7986_wm8960_machine_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+ struct snd_soc_card *card = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
+ struct mt7986_wm8960_priv *priv = snd_soc_card_get_drvdata(card);
+
+ of_node_put(priv->codec_node);
+ of_node_put(priv->platform_node);
+}
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_OF
Your probe function *relies on* devicetree, and you're adding an ifdef for
CONFIG_OF? That wouldn't make sense, would it? ;-)
+static const struct of_device_id mt7986_wm8960_machine_dt_match[] = {
+ {.compatible = "mediatek,mt7986-wm8960-machine",},
please...
{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt7986-wm8960-machine" },
+ { /* sentinel */ }
+};
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, mt7986_wm8960_machine_dt_match);
+#endif
+
+static struct platform_driver mt7986_wm8960_machine = {
+ .driver = {
+ .name = "mt7986-wm8960",
+#ifdef CONFIG_OF
Check `struct device_driver`: const struct of_device_id *of_match_table is
always present, there's no ifdef.... and that's done in order to avoid seeing
a bunch of ifdefs in drivers...
...so, why is this callback enclosed in an ifdef?
Please drop all those ifdefs.
After addressing those last comments, you can get my
Reviewed-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Regards,
Angelo
