[Sound-open-firmware] Distribution of sof firmware and tplg files

[Jaroslav Kysela]

Dne 15. 01. 20 v 18:08 Pierre-Louis Bossart napsal(a):
> 
> 
>>>>> It sounds like we are all aligned on this objective, albeit using
>>>>> different repos. Are there any objections to ldc files in alsa-ucm-conf
>>>>> providing a debug script can find the correct ldc file at runtime ?
>>>>
>>>> As a packager, I would like to have the debug info and tools separate.
>>>> We can ask user to install the debug package and the extra tools on
>>>> demand.
>>>
>>> That's not possible in all cases to have an on-demand install. Yocto and
>>> others in the embedded world create one image that needs to contain
>>> everything at flash time. Granted there may be engineering and user
>>> releases, but no everyone has the flexibility to do an rpm/apt install
>>> from a command line.
>>
>> But it's distro decision, isn't? If you bundle .ldc files forcefully,
>> it's not a good way in my eyes. We should pick it depending on the use.
>> Also, flash images are build for one specific device, so there's no
>> issue to bundle one .ldc with tools, if the packager decides. We manage
>> universal distros and the debug symbols should be optional and on demand.
> 
> Absolutely it's a distro decision, but your wording suggested otherwise.
> 
> I am sorry but I still see obscure points in your proposal:
> 
> 1) one repository with all things linked through the annotate tags (release)
>     - firmware binary
>     - .ldc file for the firmware
>     - topology binary
> 2) sof-debug package with all .ldc files and tools to extract the traces,
>      other debug tools
> 
> << why is this needed, if we already have 1)? As mentioned above, are we
> talking about a repo or a package, which are different things.

Because we need something for the end users. Also, it helps packagers. If you 
don't need an easy debug feedback or you are ready to point users to the .ldc 
files from the reference repository, we are all fine. It was just an idea.

> 3) linux-firmware updates (without any special cases)
> 
> << would you use this, or pick firmware from 1)? And how would you know
> if you need to take 'special cases' or not?

My opinion is that any special firmware file which requires additional kernel 
configuration using the kernel config or kernel parameters is not required to 
be distributed in linux-firmware. If someone wants it, it can picked from the 
reference repository. I assume that only the last released SOF firmware will 
be available via linux-firmware.

					Jaroslav

-- 
Jaroslav Kysela <perex at perex.cz>
Linux Sound Maintainer; ALSA Project; Red Hat, Inc.