I know you are already working for it for Intel
https://github.com/plbossart/sound/commits/fix/codec-legacy-dai
and, it will be conflict to my posted patch style.
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10888741/ https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10888745/
So, I can avoid to posting patch for Intel, then, you need to update it again for modern style CPU. Or, I can update Intel by using above macro. What is your opinion ?
I must admit I didn't look at the new style. With all due respect I am not sold, it's becoming a lot less intuitive and readable, e.g.:
+SND_SOC_DAI_LINK_CCP(aif1, + SND_SOC_DAI_LINK(SDL_CPU("samsung-i2s.0")), + SND_SOC_DAI_LINK(SDL_CODEC("wm8994-codec", "wm8994-aif1")), + SND_SOC_DAI_LINK(SDL_PLATFORM("samsung-i2s.0"))); + +SND_SOC_DAI_LINK_CCP(fifo_tx, + SND_SOC_DAI_LINK(SDL_CPU("samsung-i2s-sec")), + SND_SOC_DAI_LINK(SDL_CODEC("wm8994-codec", "wm8994-aif1")), + SND_SOC_DAI_LINK(SDL_PLATFORM("samsung-i2s-sec"))); + static struct snd_soc_dai_link smdk_dai[] = { { /* Primary DAI i/f */ .name = "WM8994 AIF1", .stream_name = "Pri_Dai", - .cpu_dai_name = "samsung-i2s.0", - .codec_dai_name = "wm8994-aif1", - .platform_name = "samsung-i2s.0", - .codec_name = "wm8994-codec", .init = smdk_wm8994_init_paiftx, .dai_fmt = SND_SOC_DAIFMT_I2S | SND_SOC_DAIFMT_NB_NF | SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBM_CFM, .ops = &smdk_ops, + SND_SOC_LINK_CCP(aif1),
is this really the new direction? Even the acronyms are not simple, it took me 15mn to figure out that CCP stood for CPU/Codec/Platform and I couldn't figure out what SDL means. The multiple repetitions of SND_SOC_DAI_LINK is also misleading, it's just a property of the *same* dailink that you handle.
I am even more nervous since we have a need to explicitly some cpu and codec dai names depending on quirks, with the additional abstraction it'll become plain unreadable - or we need new helpers.