Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] ASoC: Intel: Remove obsolete solutions and components

From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
To: "Rojewski, Cezary" <cezary.rojewski@intel.com>,
	"alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>
Cc: "Hejmowski, Krzysztof" <krzysztof.hejmowski@intel.com>,
	"Kaczmarski, Filip" <filip.kaczmarski@intel.com>,
	"N, Harshapriya" <harshapriya.n@intel.com>,
	"ppapierkowski@habana.ai" <ppapierkowski@habana.ai>,
	"Barlik, Marcin" <marcin.barlik@intel.com>,
	"zwisler@google.com" <zwisler@google.com>,
	"pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com"
	<pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>,
	"lgirdwood@gmail.com" <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	"Proborszcz, Filip" <filip.proborszcz@intel.com>,
	"broonie@kernel.org" <broonie@kernel.org>,
	"amadeuszx.slawinski@linux.intel.com"
	<amadeuszx.slawinski@linux.intel.com>,
	"Wasko, Michal" <michal.wasko@intel.com>,
	"tiwai@suse.com" <tiwai@suse.com>,
	"andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com"
	<andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
	"cujomalainey@chromium.org" <cujomalainey@chromium.org>,
	"Gopal, Vamshi Krishna" <vamshi.krishna.gopal@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] ASoC: Intel: Remove obsolete solutions and components
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 11:30:43 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <410bd0d7-348a-4016-683f-6fce78aa3046@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d64473eb74bb4428a25f9c7903e295e5@intel.com>

HI,

On 10/12/20 11:24 AM, Rojewski, Cezary wrote:
> On 2020-10-12 10:26 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 10/6/20 8:48 AM, Cezary Rojewski wrote:

<snip>

> Hello Hans,
> 
> Thanks for your help during maintenance of BYT & CHT products.
> Agreed, will Cc you in future series for listed devices.

Great, thank you.

>> FWIW (since that this is already merged) I'm fine with removing the
>> quite old Bay Trail support from common/sst-acpi.c, at least Fedora
>> has been using the medium-old (with SOF being the new thing)
>> CONFIG_SND_SST_IPC_ACPI support for Bay Trail audio support for
>> quite some time now.
>>
> 
> Please note CONFIG_SND_SST_IPC_ACPI is targeting /atom/ solution, not
> the /baytrail/ one (see the /atom/sst/Makefile). Fact that is has been
> used within /common/sst-acpi.c is a developer's mistake probably caused
> by generic naming of mentioned kconfig.
> 
> I'll send a patch today somewhat addressing this inconsistency.

Ok.

>> This is not just about Bay Trail And Cherry Trail devices though,
>> this series also makes changes impacting Haswell and Broadwell devices.
>>
>> The commit removing this support claims that at least for Haswell the
>> new sound/soc/intel/catpt replaces it, but I do not see that code in
>> 5.9, so that means that in one cycle we are both introducing the
>> replacement and dropping the old code ?  I'm not sure if that is such
>> a great idea, what is the fallback plan if testing does find significant
>> issues with the new catpt code ?
>>
>> Anyways since AFAIK this series is already in next I guess we will
>> find out how this goes.
>>
> 
> Your report about this series being merged to v5.9 is worrying. It is
> not supposed to be there as catpt-series is its direct dependency. Cover
> letter for the latter mentions that explicitly while this series starts
> with "Follow up to catpt series".

Sorry for causing a misunderstanding, this series is not merged for
5.9, AFAICT it is queued up for 5.10. What I was trying to say is that
the new catpt code is also NOT in 5.9.  So 5.9 will both get the
replacement catpt code and drop the old sst-acpi support for Broadwell /
Haswell in a single cycle.

<snip>

> Given the work that has been done behind the scenes, I'd argue hsw/bdw
> has never been in the better place than it is today - that goes for
> both, Linux and Windows solutions as both worlds took part in this
> project. Code rewritten, actual CI running, several setups in racks,
> documentation refreshed, FW + SW windows again on thier legs and so on.

Ok, sounds good, hopefully thing will work out fine for HSW/BDW in 5.10
then.

Regards,

Hans