[alsa-devel] [PATCH 03/11] ASoC: Intel: add mutual exclusion between SOF and legacy Baytrail driver

[Curtis Malainey]

On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 9:45 AM Cezary Rojewski
<cezary.rojewski at intel.com> wrote:
>
> On 2019-11-04 22:52, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 11/4/19 2:18 PM, Cezary Rojewski wrote:
> >> On 2019-11-01 18:30, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> >>> This legacy driver is already deprecated, let's make sure there is no
> >>> conflict with SOF.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart
> >>> <pierre-louis.bossart at linux.intel.com>
> >>
> >> Pierre, with SOF replacing /atom and /baytrail for BYT platforms, is
> >> /baytrail (legacy) used on any of the setups officially? While @ IGK
> >> I'm playing with anything from HSW up to TGL and above, /baytrail gets
> >> skipped entirely, even here.
> >
> > The legacy Baytrail driver is still used by Baytrail Chromebooks, and
> > that choice is not something we control. If Google transition to SOF for
> > Baytrail, then we can remove this driver altogether.
> > The Atom Baytrail driver is enabled by default (default ACPI). Only when
> > we have support for Baytrail-CR can we deprecate Baytrail/Atom.
> > Does this answer to your question?
> > -Pierre
>
> Thanks for explanation, Pierre. Indeed it does.
> I hoped Baytrails are getting updated together with Cherrytrails, oh well.
Should I get the chance, I fully intended to promote baytrail to SOF,
unfortunately I also have a lot of other projects I am balancing.
> _______________________________________________
> Alsa-devel mailing list
> Alsa-devel at alsa-project.org
> https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel