On Wed, 14 Jun 2017 07:41:10 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
On Wed, 14 Jun 2017 07:25:17 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
But while writing this, I noticed that Broxton-T seems forgotten. Doesn't it need the similar workaround for SKL+ chips?
I meant like below.
Can anyone confirm whether it is required or not?
There are two things applied specific to BXT: one is the generic SKL+ quirk and another is a quick to reduce DMA latency. Maybe the latter one is superfluous for BXT-T but only the former one is needed?
thanks,
Takashi
Takashi
-- 8< -- From: Takashi Iwai tiwai@suse.de Subject: [PATCH] ALSA: hda - Apply quirks to Broxton-T, too
Broxton-T was a forgotten child and we didn't apply the quirks properly. Let's fix it.
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Takashi Iwai tiwai@suse.de
sound/pci/hda/hda_intel.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/sound/pci/hda/hda_intel.c b/sound/pci/hda/hda_intel.c index e3c696c46a21..774f72b26d13 100644 --- a/sound/pci/hda/hda_intel.c +++ b/sound/pci/hda/hda_intel.c @@ -369,7 +369,8 @@ enum { #define IS_KBL(pci) ((pci)->vendor == 0x8086 && (pci)->device == 0xa171) #define IS_KBL_LP(pci) ((pci)->vendor == 0x8086 && (pci)->device == 0x9d71) #define IS_KBL_H(pci) ((pci)->vendor == 0x8086 && (pci)->device == 0xa2f0) -#define IS_BXT(pci) ((pci)->vendor == 0x8086 && (pci)->device == 0x5a98) +#define IS_BXT(pci) ((pci)->vendor == 0x8086 && \
((pci)->device == 0x5a98 || (pci)->device == 0x1a98))#define IS_GLK(pci) ((pci)->vendor == 0x8086 && (pci)->device == 0x3198) #define IS_CFL(pci) ((pci)->vendor == 0x8086 && (pci)->device == 0xa348)
#define IS_SKL_PLUS(pci) (IS_SKL(pci) || IS_SKL_LP(pci) || IS_BXT(pci)) || \
2.13.1