On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 10:21 PM Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 10/10/19 10:57 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 09:48:14PM +0300, Daniel Baluta wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 9:15 PM Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> My topics: > > > > I'll add these to the agenda. > > > >> - SOF driver: ACPI / DT unification > > > > Are there concrete plans to discuss here or is this more of a > > "what are we doing" kind of thing? ACPI standardization has been > > an issue :/ > > I took this agenda item as "how machine drivers are handled in SOF". > > Currently the core creates a platform device which will result in a > machine driver being probe and the card created. This is mainly due to > the lack of 'machine device' in existing DSDT tables. DT has explicit > support for machine drivers, so we need to have a solution that caters > to both. > > > > >> - SOF driver: Handling built-in driver use case > > > > What's the issue here? > > The SOF driver (or any existing driver with closed-source firmware) will > not work when compiled as built-in due to the request_firmware() > dependency. This wasn't too much of an issue for Intel so far, but for > i.MX platforms it's quite common to have no modules. > > Daniel, did I get things right? Yes, thanks for jumping in! This is exactly what I was thinking of. Daniel. _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
