[alsa-devel] [PATCH 0/7][RFC] ASoC: modern style CPU

[Kuninori Morimoto]

Hi Pierre-Louis

Thank you for your feedback

> +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")));
(snip)
>  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 reason of "CCP" (= CPU/CODEC/PLATFORM) was to avoid long naming.
and SDL is acronyms of "Snd soc Dai Link". but yes, it is un-understandable.
It should be more understandable (and possibly short) naming.

> The multiple repetitions of SND_SOC_DAI_LINK is also
> misleading, it's just a property of the *same* dailink that you
> handle.

it is needed to handle both single/multi CPU/Codec/Platform.
But yes, it has naming issue.

> 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.

Hmm, OK.
I will reconsider about macro.
I'm happy if you can review it again.

Thank you for your help !!

Best regards
---
Kuninori Morimoto