On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 12:06:35PM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
On 9/27/17 4:45 AM, Vinod Koul wrote:
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 02:13:23PM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
On 9/25/17 11:23 PM, Vinod Koul wrote:
On Fri, Sep 08, 2017 at 03:56:58PM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
+extern struct snd_soc_acpi_mach snd_soc_acpi_intel_haswell_machines[]; +extern struct snd_soc_acpi_mach snd_soc_acpi_intel_broadwell_machines[]; +extern struct snd_soc_acpi_mach snd_soc_acpi_intel_baytrail_legacy_machines[]; +extern struct snd_soc_acpi_mach snd_soc_acpi_intel_baytrail_machines[]; +extern struct snd_soc_acpi_mach snd_soc_acpi_intel_cherrytrail_machines[];
so the header is just for externs, not a pretty thing, can we avoid these somehow. Do they need to be in common file, why not keep then in respective byt/hsw file.
Because they will be shared between drivers, that's the whole point. I can't put a common table in either of sound/soc/sof or sound/soc/intel/atom. I didn't find a better solution than a module with just tables + matching functions in it.
yes but shared between byt family or hsw family, maybe a common byt-tables.c hsw-tables.c and we can move skl ones out to skl-tables.c
oh, if you are talking about splitting the tables in different files yes this is no issue. I thought you objected to the declaration of the tables themselves.
Yes. I would like to avoid an endless file for externs. Let the respective platform build those into that driver