On Thu, 2020-08-13 at 20:11 +0200, Cezary Rojewski wrote:
On 2020-08-13 6:00 PM, Liam Girdwood wrote:
On Wed, 2020-08-12 at 22:57 +0200, Cezary Rojewski wrote:
Implement support for Lynxpoint and Wildcat Point AudioDSP. Catpt
solution deprecates existing sound/soc/intel/haswell which is removed in
the following series. This cover-letter is followed by 'Developer's deep
dive' message schedding light on catpt's key concepts and areas
addressed.
Whilst I applaud removing the old driver I do NOT support adding yet *another* Intel audio DSP driver. Our goal is to remove DSP drivers and unify under one codebase (and this was discussed in Lyon last year at the audio Miniconf).
Please take all these good improvements and add them into the SOF driver.
Please also remember that we are adding an IPC abstraction layer into the SOF driver so it can cope with multiple IPC versions. You are most welcome to help in this effort.
Presented catpt is created as a solution to existing problems reported by clients and users for WPT platforms. It is not "yet another" DSP driver but an update to an existing one - due to high range of problems found when testing it, catpt came as a lower-cost solution and /haswell/ is being removed soon after. So, the status quo is maintained - single driver for LPT/WPT architecture.
Its a new driver. Fix the old driver or (preferred) fix the SOF driver so we can remove the haswell driver and have one less DSP driver to maintain.
Please don't use 'our goal' term, it's misplaced: it was agreed on several occasions that older DSP platforms remain with closed firmware and are to be supported with existing DSP drivers.
I'm not suggesting using SOF FW, but using the existing FW with the IPC abstraction.
SOF FW does not support BDW and instead is tasked with support of newer platforms. Neither SOF FW team nor Chrome support team agreed with WPT being moved out of closed firmware. Please, speak with management first before writing statements saying otherwise.
To be clear - I'm saying fix the SOF driver to use the old FW (not the SOF FW). You know that we need IPC abstraction here (and for other platforms)
I don't see your input for any of the patches. Internal heads-up has been given. No review for either internal or upstream patchsets. Afterall, you were the author of original /haswell/ and your input could have proved important in speeding the progress and yielding even better results to our clients.
Please don't mistake silence for my approval. I knew that updates were forthcoming but not a new driver.
As you've given no technical points for denying LPT/WPT improvements and your statement disagrees with management's decision, message shall be discarded and ignored for the rest of the upstream process. Further discussion will be taken off this list.
Mark, Takashi and others, I'm sorry for this inconvenience, such actions do not represent One Intel and Truth & Transparency which Intel is committed to stand by.
Seriously ? It's really simple for anyone to understand that introducing a new driver introduces new bugs. It's also very well understood that fixing or extending existing drivers is always the best path forwards over adding another new immature driver.
I hope you understand that long term **convergence** is key for quality, maintainability and reduced effort, if not, I'm happy have a call.
Thanks
Liam