On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 03:29:24PM +0800, Jiaxin Yu wrote:
From: Jiaxin Yu jiaxin.yu@mediatek.corp-partner.google.com
The environment didn't configure properly so that the header showed up. See [1].
[1]: https://git-scm.com/docs/git-send-email#Documentation/git-send-email.txt---f...
diff --git a/sound/soc/mediatek/mt8192/mt8192-mt6359-rt1015-rt5682.c b/sound/soc/mediatek/mt8192/mt8192-mt6359-rt1015-rt5682.c
[...]
+static struct snd_soc_card mt8192_mt6359_rt1015p_rt5682s_card = {
- .name = "mt8192_mt6359_rt1015p_rt5682s",
- .owner = THIS_MODULE,
- .dai_link = mt8192_mt6359_dai_links,
- .num_links = ARRAY_SIZE(mt8192_mt6359_dai_links),
- .controls = mt8192_mt6359_rt1015p_rt5682_controls,
- .num_controls = ARRAY_SIZE(mt8192_mt6359_rt1015p_rt5682_controls),
- .dapm_widgets = mt8192_mt6359_rt1015p_rt5682_widgets,
- .num_dapm_widgets = ARRAY_SIZE(mt8192_mt6359_rt1015p_rt5682_widgets),
- .dapm_routes = mt8192_mt6359_rt1015p_rt5682_routes,
- .num_dapm_routes = ARRAY_SIZE(mt8192_mt6359_rt1015p_rt5682_routes),
+};
Are the two cards only different from names (mt8192_mt6359_rt1015p_rt5682_card vs. mt8192_mt6359_rt1015p_rt5682s_card)?
@@ -1150,6 +1177,52 @@ static int mt8192_mt6359_dev_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) dai_link->num_platforms = ARRAY_SIZE(i2s3_rt1015p_platforms); }
} else if (strcmp(dai_link->name, "I2S8") == 0) {if (card == &mt8192_mt6359_rt1015_rt5682_card ||card == &mt8192_mt6359_rt1015p_rt5682_card) {dai_link->cpus = i2s8_rt5682_cpus;dai_link->num_cpus =ARRAY_SIZE(i2s8_rt5682_cpus);dai_link->codecs = i2s8_rt5682_codecs;dai_link->num_codecs =ARRAY_SIZE(i2s8_rt5682_codecs);dai_link->platforms = i2s8_rt5682_platforms;dai_link->num_platforms =ARRAY_SIZE(i2s8_rt5682_platforms);} else if (card == &mt8192_mt6359_rt1015p_rt5682s_card) {dai_link->cpus = i2s8_rt5682s_cpus;dai_link->num_cpus =ARRAY_SIZE(i2s8_rt5682s_cpus);dai_link->codecs = i2s8_rt5682s_codecs;dai_link->num_codecs =ARRAY_SIZE(i2s8_rt5682s_codecs);dai_link->platforms = i2s8_rt5682s_platforms;dai_link->num_platforms =ARRAY_SIZE(i2s8_rt5682s_platforms);}} else if (strcmp(dai_link->name, "I2S9") == 0) {if (card == &mt8192_mt6359_rt1015_rt5682_card ||card == &mt8192_mt6359_rt1015p_rt5682_card) {dai_link->cpus = i2s9_rt5682_cpus;dai_link->num_cpus =ARRAY_SIZE(i2s9_rt5682_cpus);dai_link->codecs = i2s9_rt5682_codecs;dai_link->num_codecs =ARRAY_SIZE(i2s9_rt5682_codecs);dai_link->platforms = i2s9_rt5682_platforms;dai_link->num_platforms =ARRAY_SIZE(i2s9_rt5682_platforms);} else if (card == &mt8192_mt6359_rt1015p_rt5682s_card) {dai_link->cpus = i2s9_rt5682s_cpus;dai_link->num_cpus =ARRAY_SIZE(i2s9_rt5682s_cpus);dai_link->codecs = i2s9_rt5682s_codecs;dai_link->num_codecs =ARRAY_SIZE(i2s9_rt5682s_codecs);dai_link->platforms = i2s9_rt5682s_platforms;dai_link->num_platforms =ARRAY_SIZE(i2s9_rt5682s_platforms);}
After seeing the code, I am starting to wonder if the reuse is overkill. If they (RT5682 vs. RT5682S) only have some minor differences, probably it could reuse more by:
SND_SOC_DAILINK_DEFS(i2s8, ... SND_SOC_DAILINK_DEFS(i2s9, ...
...
if (card == &mt8192_mt6359_rt1015p_rt5682s_card) { i2s8_codecs.name = RT5682S_DEV0_NAME; i2s8_codecs.dai_name = RT5682S_CODEC_DAI; ... }
Or even uses of_device_is_compatible() if it would like to reuse the struct snd_soc_card.