[alsa-devel] ASoC: Intel: sst: Missing IRQ at index 5 on BYT-T device

[Antonio Ospite]

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 18:35:02 +0100
Stephan Gerhold <stephan at gerhold.net> wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 10:54:55AM -0600, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> > 
> > > -static int is_byt_cr(struct device *dev, bool *bytcr)
> > > +static int is_byt_cr(struct platform_device *pdev, bool *bytcr)
> > >   {
> > > +	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> > >   	int status = 0;
> > > +	if (platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_IRQ, 5) == NULL) {
> > > +		/* This message is even shown if the device would be detected as BYT-CR below */
> > > +		dev_info(dev, "Falling back to Baytrail-CR platform\n");
> > > +		*bytcr = true;
> > > +		return status;
> > > +	}
> > > +
> > >   	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IOSF_MBI)) {
> > >   		u32 bios_status;
> > 
> > This would be my preferred solution but if it doesn't work as Hans mentions
> > it then we need to think of alternatives.
> > 
> > Baytrail platforms are so different (BIOS and hardware) that I don't think
> > we'll manage to pull this off without quirks.
> > 
> 
> It definitely works on my device and the few others I have seen with 
> only one IRQ listed. But there might be devices out there which are not 
> covered by the pmic-type based detection but still have all 6 IRQs 
> listed.
> 
> As for the "Teclast X98 Air 3G": Antonio, you mentioned that you have 
> last tested mainline a few years back. Can you re-test without any 
> modifications to the DSDT table on a recent mainline kernel?
>

I'll try to boot a recent kernel with the original DSDT this Sunday, if
I fail to find the time I should be able to do it on Dec 27th.

Ciao,
   Antonio

-- 
Antonio Ospite
https://ao2.it
https://twitter.com/ao2it

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
   See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?