[alsa-devel] snd_soc_set_dmi_name - Shouldn't it use SYS_VENDOR?

[Pierre-Louis Bossart]

On 4/27/17 1:00 PM, Daniel Drake wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Nice to see DMI info being attached to SoC sound devices so that we
> can differentiate between differerent products in userspace, thanks
> for the effort there.
>
> However I just noticed that it using DMI_BOARD_VENDOR. Is this intentional?
>
> I have several examples of products here where DMI_BOARD_VENDOR is not
> set to a meaningful value, but DMI_SYS_VENDOR is just fine. DMI quirks
> in the kernel ordinarily tend to match products by combining
> DMI_SYS_VENDOR with DMI_PRODUCT_NAME.
>
> In the SMBIOS data format, Type 1 (System information) includes
> DMI_SYS_VENDOR and DMI_PRODUCT_NAME. Type 2 (Base board information)
> includes DMI_BOARD_VENDOR and DMI_BOARD_NAME. See dmi_decode() in
> drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c
>
> It seems strange that ASoC is pulling the product name from Type 1 but
> the vendor from type 2. Can we make it instead just use Type 1 data,
> DMI_SYS_VENDOR and DMI_PRODUCT_NAME?

There is a bit of variability here, the quirks we use are based on:

DMI_BOARD_VENDOR
DMI_SYS_VENDOR
DMI_PRODUCT_NAME
DMI_PRODUCT_VERSION (typically for Lenovo programs)
DMI_BOARD_NAME (for reference designs)

Not sure if we can really limit the conventions to type1 or type2 if we 
want the names to be somewhat meaningful.

I can't recall why we selected DMI_BOARD_VENDOR instead of 
DMI_SYS_VENDOR though.

>
> Thanks
> Daniel
> _______________________________________________
> Alsa-devel mailing list
> Alsa-devel at alsa-project.org
> http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
>