[PATCH v2 09/14] ASoC: audio-graph-card2: add Yaml Document
Kuninori Morimoto
kuninori.morimoto.gx at renesas.com
Mon Jul 26 04:19:20 CEST 2021
Hi Mark
Thank you for clearing the topics.
I think I could understand Rob and your expectation.
> It's more about making sure that new users that currently use
> simple-card are using audio-graph-card instead - we need to keep
> simple-card around for existing users (or at least the binding but
> probably it's more effort than it's worth to merge the binding parsing
> code elsewhere) but we should be avoiding adding new users of it. I've
> been pushing people to use audio-graph-card for a while, TBH we should
> probably just go ahead and flag simple-card as deprecated in the binding
> now since I don't think there's any reason anyone is forced to use it at
> this point.
(snip)
> > > Why do we need these changes? I'm not wild about a new generic binding
> > > replacing an existing one which only has 2 or 3 users IIRC. Plus
> > > there's already the Renesas variant. (On the flip side, only a few
> > > users, easier to deprecate the old binding.)
>
> > Sorry I don't understand
> > - Who is "2 or 3 users" ?
>
> Just that there's not that many users of the existing audio-graph-card
> (though it's a bit more than 2 or 3 and it's newer stuff rather than
> old).
(snip)
> I think what Rob is looking for here is a more detailed description of
> what the problems are with the existing binding that require a new
> binding - what's driving these big changes? TBH this is part of why
> I've been holding off on review, I need to get my head round why we
> can't fix the existing binding in place.
OK, let's cleanup the problem.
O : supported
- : not supported
x : Annotated
simple-card
O: Normal connection
-: DPCM
-: Multi CPU/Codec
-: Codec2Codec
audio-graph-card
(A) O: Normal connection
(B) x: DPCM
-: Multi CPU/Codec
-: Codec2Codec
x: Tegra uses is as customize audio-graph-card
audio-graph-card2
O: Normal connection
O: DPCM
O: Multi CPU/Codec
O: Codec2Codec
We need to keep simple-card, I think there is no discussion is needed here.
About audio-graph-card vs audio-graph-card2,
I think keeping (A) only on audio-graph-card2 is not super difficult
(But some message will be indicated. see below).
Supporting (B) on audio-graph-card2 is difficult.
I'm not sure detail, but we can do like this ?
step 1)
- add audio-graph-card2 which have (A) compatibility.
- indicate "audio-graph-card will be deprecated" on audio-graph-card
step 2)
- Tegra switch to use audio-graph-card2
- confirm that all existing audio-graph-card user have no problem on
audio-graph-card2 too.
step 3)
- remove audio-graph-card
My concerns are...
- I'm not sure how DT is strict.
If we removed audio-graph-card, but user uses old Tegra DT on it...
We can't remove audio-graph-card forever if DT was super strict (?).
- The naming of audio-graph-card vs audio-graph-card2 driver file.
because audio-graph-card will be removed later.
- audio-graph-card2 can keep (A) compatible, but some features
are not recommended. Existing user will get such message.
And because of this compatibility, audio-graph-card2 can't remove
this "un-recommended" feature.
Thank you for your help !!
Best regards
---
Kuninori Morimoto
More information about the Alsa-devel
mailing list