[PATCH 3/4] ASoC: mediatek: mt8195: separate the common code from machine driver
Mark Brown
broonie at kernel.org
Fri Nov 5 08:38:51 PDT 2021
On Fri, Nov 05, 2021 at 12:11:55PM +0800, Trevor Wu wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-11-04 at 15:39 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > I don't follow why the DSP support requires a new driver? Shouldn't
> > all
> > systems with the DSP present be using it?
> We need to keep the solution without DSP, so we can replace DSP
> solution with non-DSP when it's required. But when we introduce SOF for
> DSP control, there will be more routes in machine driver and device
> tree usage is different from the original. So it's hard to share the
> same driver for these two solutions.
We shouldn't be requiring people to load completely different drivers
based on software configuration, what if a system wants to bypass the
DSP in some but not all configurations? Can we not just have controls
allowing users to route round the DSP where appropriate?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20211105/17c9793b/attachment.sig>
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list