[PATCH v3 01/10] ARM: tegra: Set the sound card model that alsaucm expects

[Tomeu Vizoso]

On 02/03/2015 05:35 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 02/03/2015 06:13 AM, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
>> On 2 February 2015 at 22:08, Stephen Warren <swarren at wwwdotorg.org> wrote:
>>> On 01/28/2015 03:50 AM, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Patches are on its way to add a config file to alsaucm for the Nyan
>>>> boards. Use the same card ID that alsaucm will expect.
>>>
>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra124-nyan-big.dts
>>>> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra124-nyan-big.dts
>>>
>>>
>>>>          sound {
>>>> -               compatible = "nvidia,tegra-audio-max98090-nyan-big",
>>>> +               compatible = "nvidia,tegra-audio-max98090-nyan",
>>>>                               "nvidia,tegra-audio-max98090";
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm not convinced that removing the board-specific compatible value is a
>>> great idea. What if we find we need to distinguish between different boards
>>> that use this same binding in the future. That situation is exactly why we
>>> have board-/SoC-specific values in compatible even if we don't immediately
>>> use them.
>>
>> I understand the need of naming each component variant so they can be
>> distinguished in the future, but in this case it's the exact same hw.
> 
> That's not true. These are two different boards that are derived from 
> the same base design. The intent may be that they are the same, but the 
> whole point of board-specific compatible values is to cover the case 
> where mistakes and exceptions appear later.

Fair enough.

>>>> -               nvidia,model = "Acer Chromebook 13";
>>>> +               nvidia,model = "GoogleNyan";
>>>
>>>
>>> I believe this also technically breaks ABI, since some user-space tools use
>>> the model to look up saved state. Can we not leave this as is, and just have
>>> the UCM files know about both names?
>>
>> Well, "A13" isn't a great card id. Given that there's no users yet, I
>> would prefer to take this chance to put a sane value in there. Btw,
>> alsa-lib has now a UCM config for this and it uses the GoogleNyan card
>> id (has been picked up already by OpenSUSE).
> 
> "A13" didn't appear anywhere, did it? Perhaps that was a shorthand for 
> "Acer Chromebook 13". Yes, I agree we should use the user-visible model 
> number here; "Acer CB5" or perhaps "Acer CB5-xxx" whatever xxx actually is.

Ok, so we can go with Acer-CB5-311 for the nyan big.

Unfortunately there doesn't exist a single product id that corresponds
with the nyan blaze, but at least four: K4K83UA, K4K11UA, K4K78UA and
K4K23UA. The commercial name of the series that contain a blaze board is
"HP Chromebook 14 G3", but that doesn't fit in the card id field (16 byte).

What do you think of using GoogleNyanBig and GoogleNyanBlaze? Or maybe
just NyanBig and NyanBlaze? IMO it's more important that the card ids
correspond 1-to-1 to the hw than their recognizability, as it's not
something that end users will be messing with.

Regards,

Tomeu

>> So in this case, I think it would be good to change the card id now
>> before people start to actually use it.
> 
>