On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 09:32:42PM +0100, Stephan Gerhold wrote: > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 01:39:13PM -0600, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: > > Thanks for the additional information. > > > The call to iosf_mbi_read() returns 0x400b0100 > > > > > > /* bits 26:27 mirror PMIC options */ > > > bios_status = (bios_status >> 26) & 3; > > > > > > Results in bios_status = 0x0 > > So that's a fail. > > > > > > The stock kernel printed this on every startup: > > > > > > SPID updated according to ACPI Table: > > > spid customer id : 0000 > > > spid vendor id : 0000 > > > spid manufacturer id : 00ff > > > spid platform family id : 0007 --> INTEL_BYT_TABLET > > > spid product line id : 0000 --> INTEL_BYT_TABLET_BLK_PRO > > > spid hardware id : 0004 --> BYT_TABLET_BLK_8PR0 /* Bay Lake FFRD-8 PR0 */ > > > spid fru[4..0] : 00 00 00 00 00 > > > spid fru[9..5] : 00 00 00 00 00 > > > > > > Based on spid.h [1] I added the "-->" above. Then I guessed that this is > > > BYT-T (there is another "BYT T CR V2" value), but to be honest I don't > > > know for sure. > > > > > > [1]: https://github.com/me176c-dev/me176c-kernel/blob/stock/kernel/arch/x86/include/asm/spid.h > > > > Oh man, Bay Lake...this must be at least 6 years old and 30+ kernel versions > > behind... Only a couple of years and it'll be a collector item :-) > > > > Yeah, the device was shipped with a 3.10 kernel but I believe that file > was just copied from an earlier 3.4 kernel. I have never bothered to even > try to compile that thing, I just use it as reference every now and then. :) > > > I can't recall any of the details so we'll have to wing it. it could be that > > it was baytrail-T but with the software/BIOS for Baytrail-Cr, who knows. > > > > > > > > > I don't mean to dismiss your claim, just want to find out if this is a case > > > > where the PMIC-type-based byt_cr detection fails or if we have a BIOS issue. > > > > Another smoking gun is if you find in your code traces of SSP0 being used. > > > > > > > The quirks to get sound working with bytcr-rt5640 on that device are: > > > BYT_RT5640_SSP0_AIF1 | BYT_RT5640_IN1_MAP | BYT_RT5640_MCLK_EN > > > > > > I guess this means that SSP0 is being used? > > > > Yes indeed, and that makes me think we should force this device to look like > > Baytrail-CR. > > > > You can do this with a DMI-based quirk (preferably in is_byt_cr directly so > > that I can reuse the code when I move it to a helper at some point). > > Okay - thanks! One last question: > I was looking at the ACPI DSDT tables of some similar devices and have > found two others that look the same (only one IRQ listed). In this case, > the BYT-T acpi_ipc_irq_index = 5 will never work, and we will definitely > have a better chances with trying Baytrail-CR. > > One of them actually had a similar patch proposed at [1] (although they > did it in a weird way and also need an extra machine driver). > > We could also detect this situation in a generic way with something like > > if (platform_irq_count(pdev) == 1) { > *bytcr = true; > return 0; > } > > ... instead of a DMI quirk. What do you think? > To avoid confusion: The existing PMIC-type based is_byt_cr() detection would be used in all other cases (i.e. if irq_count != 1), so it won't make any difference for the devices that are already working fine. (Most BYT-CR devices seem to have 5 IRQs listed) So it's more like if (platform_irq_count(pdev) == 1) { *bytcr = true; } else { // pmic-type based detection... } with platform_irq_count == 1 as condition for the "quirk". > [1]: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9764493/#20539549 > > > > > Also I guess you'd need a second quirk in bytcr_rt5640 since the default is > > SSP0-AIF2. > > > > -Pierre > > _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
