From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kuninori Morimoto Subject: Re: 'modern dailink' transition Date: 25 Mar 2019 12:19:52 +0900 Message-ID: <878sx3ire2.wl-kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> References: <21d1e439-7ecd-dd6a-9a43-e66e8db1ac85@linux.intel.com> <20190321141242.GE5684@sirena.org.uk> <87ftrbivbr.wl-kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from relmlie6.idc.renesas.com (relmlor2.renesas.com [210.160.252.172]) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64956F801D9 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 04:19:55 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <87ftrbivbr.wl-kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: "Alsa-devel" To: Mark Brown , Pierre-Louis Bossart Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org Oops ?? I exchanged mail address - alsa-devel@alsa-devel.org + alsa-devel@alsa-project.org > Hi Pierre, Mark > > > > I am however struggling with the notion of a 'snd-soc-dummy' platform that > > > exists in some legacy Intel machine drivers. I changed the code following > > > the pattern below but I have really no idea if this is correct. Shouldn't > > > all dailinks either point to a real platform driver or not provide any > > > information about the platform at all? Is there any specific expectation on > > > the ASoC side here? > > I guess my posted "no Platform" and "no implicit snd-soc-dummy" patch idea > confused you. If so, I'm so sorry about that. > I'm not sure this idea is Good or Bad. > > > I'd expect the dummy driver to just get automatically substituted when > > required, I'd not expect users to explicitly list it. > > Yes agree. > > This is my understanding, please correct me if I was wrong. > I think current many sound card which doesn't need "platfrom" are 2 patterns. > > 1) select snd-soc-dummy as platfrom > 2) select cpu component as platfrom > > Current ASoC selects 1) automatically if .platfrom_name was NULL. > And driver needs to have below if it want to be 2) > > dai_link->platform_of_node = dai_link->cpu_of_node > > But, I think one of them is enough ? > I mean select 2) automatically can be OK? > In other words, current some sound card which doesn't need > platfrom is calling snd-soc-dummy platfrom method in 1) case. > But, is it needed ? I'm not sure... > > It seems snd-soc-dummy platfrom is caring about DPCM-BE case, > but, I think CPU is snd-soc-dummy in such case. > Maybe we need same cade to dummy CPU (?), but *my* DPCM system > is working correctly without it. > > Best regards > --- > Kuninori Morimoto