On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 10:55 PM Srinivas Kandagatla srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org wrote:
On 20/10/2020 15:37, Mark Brown wrote:
I don't understand what "logic scattered in various dtsi files" means, sorry.
Yes, that should work to describe the dailink we are using. But a more tricky issue is how to do calls like setting PLL in dai startup ops.
...
I think that asking a generic machine driver to do configuration like this with only a limited interface of device property might be too much of an ask for the machine driver.
Richard was looking at some basic configuration for PLLs.
Would you mind if I simplify the compatible string like Srinivas suggested, and send a v12? As for other two kinds of variations that I am aware of:
- front mic / rear mic
- replace alc5682 with adau7002
The CODEC change is going to be described in the DT no matter what - you'll have a reference to the CODEC node but it may make sense if there's enough custom code around it. For front vs rear mic the simplest thing would just be to not mention which if this is a hardware fixed thing, otherwise a control.
We can set different board names and different compatible strings to achieve such variation. So that it would make sense to describe configuration in compatible strings like you suggested, and also provides UCM a way to distinguish different boards.
I don't recall having suggested distinguishing these things with a compatible string, especially not the microphones. UCM can already use the display names for the boards to distinguish things.
Not with the compatible string!
Currently card name, and long name are exactly same in all Qualcomm soundcards, which makes it very difficult to identify how those boards re wired up at UCM2 level. So the plan is to properly populate card long name with "model" property which can include details on how things are wiredup on that board.
--srini
Hi Srini, Thanks for taking a look. Let me try to clarify your comments in case there is any misunderstanding.
I understand your request on having different board variations using different sound card names through model property, and I totally agree with that. As for compatible strings, do you insist on having all the board variations using exactly the same compatible string ?
Thanks!