On Wed, 14 Jun 2017 07:41:10 +0200,
Takashi Iwai wrote:
>
> On Wed, 14 Jun 2017 07:25:17 +0200,
> Takashi Iwai wrote:
> >
> > But while writing this, I noticed that Broxton-T seems forgotten.
> > Doesn't it need the similar workaround for SKL+ chips?
>
> I meant like below.
Can anyone confirm whether it is required or not?
There are two things applied specific to BXT: one is the generic SKL+
quirk and another is a quick to reduce DMA latency. Maybe the latter
one is superfluous for BXT-T but only the former one is needed?
thanks,
Takashi
>
> Takashi
>
> -- 8< --
> From: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: [PATCH] ALSA: hda - Apply quirks to Broxton-T, too
>
> Broxton-T was a forgotten child and we didn't apply the quirks
> properly. Let's fix it.
>
> Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> sound/pci/hda/hda_intel.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/sound/pci/hda/hda_intel.c b/sound/pci/hda/hda_intel.c
> index e3c696c46a21..774f72b26d13 100644
> --- a/sound/pci/hda/hda_intel.c
> +++ b/sound/pci/hda/hda_intel.c
> @@ -369,7 +369,8 @@ enum {
> #define IS_KBL(pci) ((pci)->vendor == 0x8086 && (pci)->device == 0xa171)
> #define IS_KBL_LP(pci) ((pci)->vendor == 0x8086 && (pci)->device == 0x9d71)
> #define IS_KBL_H(pci) ((pci)->vendor == 0x8086 && (pci)->device == 0xa2f0)
> -#define IS_BXT(pci) ((pci)->vendor == 0x8086 && (pci)->device == 0x5a98)
> +#define IS_BXT(pci) ((pci)->vendor == 0x8086 && \
> + ((pci)->device == 0x5a98 || (pci)->device == 0x1a98))
> #define IS_GLK(pci) ((pci)->vendor == 0x8086 && (pci)->device == 0x3198)
> #define IS_CFL(pci) ((pci)->vendor == 0x8086 && (pci)->device == 0xa348)
> #define IS_SKL_PLUS(pci) (IS_SKL(pci) || IS_SKL_LP(pci) || IS_BXT(pci)) || \
> --
> 2.13.1
>
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
