On 10/13/17 11:35 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 18:49 -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
- * @fw_filename: firmware file name.
+ * @fw_filename: firmware file name. Used when SOF is not enabled.
+ * @sof_fw_filename: Sound Open Firmware file name, if enabled
+ * @sof_tplg_filename: Sound Open Firmware topology file name, if
enabled
Naming looks a bit awkward to me, though I would like to bring something
else here, i.e. unifying those firmwares somehow here.
It might be dealt with using two different (embedded) structs, e.g.
enum fw_type fw_type;
union {
struct regular_fw fw;
struct sof_fw sof;
}
It looks for me slightly cleaner to this struct than bring everything
inside it.
What do you think?
It'll be up to users/distributions to select if they want the existing
drivers, or the SOF-based ones. I don't see how a union might accomplish
this - maybe I missed your point completely.
We wanted to store all the information required for both cases in one
structure tied to a specific HID. The fields for the existing solutions
were kept as is (except for the type renaming), and SOF stuff was added
as extensions.
+ const char *sof_fw_filename;
+ const char *sof_tplg_filename;
+ const char *asoc_plat_name;
+ struct platform_device * (*new_mach_data)(void *pdata);
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
