On 2020-10-12 9:42 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
On 10/12/20 9:24 AM, Rojewski, Cezary wrote:
...
Hello,
Series: [PATCH v2 00/13] ASoC: Intel: Remove obsolete solutions and components https://lore.kernel.org/alsa-devel/20201006064907.16277-1-cezary.rojewski@in...
removes sst-acpi component along with many others so further changes to said component will only cause conflicts -or- require commit reordering. I'd advice against that.
As I already mentioned in the private-thread which Pierre-Louis started with me, Jaroslav Kysela and Liam about this I would advice against applying that series for now. First we need to put in more work to make sure that the new drivers are actually ready.
Also I must say that I'm quite disappointed that since I, as the person who more or less single handedly have made sure that audio works properly o Bay Trail and Cherry Traul devices (*), has not been Cc-ed on that series, that seems like a huge oversight.
Anyways I will reply in the thread of the series and ask Mark to revert the entire series. Since IMHO the new drivers are clearly not ready yet. Yesterday I ran my first set of tested and I immediately hit a DSP hang doing just a few very basic tests.
Regards,
Hans
*) And kept it working properly despite other people breaking it with changes like moving the userspace stuff to UCM2.
Hello,
What's the name of the private-thread? Or perhaps I'm not even invited there?
Please, elaborate "new drivers". /baytrail/ has been deprecated for years with only two available boards (machine boards) to it - which are somewhat duplicates of /atom/ -or- SOF equivalents (bytcr-xxxx). From linux-kernel perspective, having 3x baytrail driver is simply bad.
Several teams, clients and groups have been asked on multiple occasions about the usage of the /baytrail/ folder. Not once positive answer has been given.
Thanks, Czarek