[PATCH 0/6] Ancillary bus implementation and SOF multi-client support

[Mark Brown]

On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 05:32:07PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 03:40:19PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:

> > Right, so my concern is that as soon as we decide we want to pass some
> > resources or platform data through to one of the subdevices it needs to
> > move over into being a platform device and vice versa.  That feels like
> > something that's going to add to the mess for some of the uses.

> There shouldn't be a need for resources or platform data to be passed
> that way as they are all "owned" by the parent device that creates
> these.

> I don't want to see platform devices become children of real devices
> (like PCI and USB and others), which is the goal here.  platform devices
> are overloaded and abused enough as it is, let's not make it worse.

How does this interact with the situation where someone makes a PCI
device that's basically a bunch of IPs glued together in a PCI memory
region (or similarly for other buses)?  The IPs all have distinct
memory regions and other resources like interrupt lines which makes them
unsuitable for auxilliary devices as proposed, especially in cases where
there's more than one copy of the IP instantiated.  There's a bunch of
PCI MFDs in tree already of admittedly varying degrees of taste, and
MFDs on other buses also use the resource passing stuff.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.alsa-project.org/pipermail/alsa-devel/attachments/20201001/5ceee29a/attachment.sig>