[03/11] ASoC: Intel: add mutual exclusion between SOF and legacy Baytrail driver
diff mbox series

Message ID 20191101173045.27099-4-pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com
State Accepted
Commit 280393b712b7e338addc2f7f60b4e4da787ba19b
Headers show
Series
  • ASoC: SOF/Intel: Kconfig improvements/fixes
Related show

Commit Message

Pierre-Louis Bossart Nov. 1, 2019, 5:30 p.m. UTC
This legacy driver is already deprecated, let's make sure there is no
conflict with SOF.

Signed-off-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>
---
 sound/soc/intel/Kconfig | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Comments

Cezary Rojewski Nov. 4, 2019, 8:18 p.m. UTC | #1
On 2019-11-01 18:30, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> This legacy driver is already deprecated, let's make sure there is no
> conflict with SOF.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>

Pierre, with SOF replacing /atom and /baytrail for BYT platforms, is 
/baytrail (legacy) used on any of the setups officially? While @ IGK I'm 
playing with anything from HSW up to TGL and above, /baytrail gets 
skipped entirely, even here.

Czarek
Pierre-Louis Bossart Nov. 4, 2019, 9:52 p.m. UTC | #2
On 11/4/19 2:18 PM, Cezary Rojewski wrote:
> On 2019-11-01 18:30, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>> This legacy driver is already deprecated, let's make sure there is no
>> conflict with SOF.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart 
>> <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>
> 
> Pierre, with SOF replacing /atom and /baytrail for BYT platforms, is 
> /baytrail (legacy) used on any of the setups officially? While @ IGK I'm 
> playing with anything from HSW up to TGL and above, /baytrail gets 
> skipped entirely, even here.

The legacy Baytrail driver is still used by Baytrail Chromebooks, and 
that choice is not something we control. If Google transition to SOF for 
Baytrail, then we can remove this driver altogether.
The Atom Baytrail driver is enabled by default (default ACPI). Only when 
we have support for Baytrail-CR can we deprecate Baytrail/Atom.
Does this answer to your question?
-Pierre
Cezary Rojewski Nov. 8, 2019, 5:44 p.m. UTC | #3
On 2019-11-04 22:52, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11/4/19 2:18 PM, Cezary Rojewski wrote:
>> On 2019-11-01 18:30, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>>> This legacy driver is already deprecated, let's make sure there is no
>>> conflict with SOF.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart 
>>> <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>
>>
>> Pierre, with SOF replacing /atom and /baytrail for BYT platforms, is 
>> /baytrail (legacy) used on any of the setups officially? While @ IGK 
>> I'm playing with anything from HSW up to TGL and above, /baytrail gets 
>> skipped entirely, even here.
> 
> The legacy Baytrail driver is still used by Baytrail Chromebooks, and 
> that choice is not something we control. If Google transition to SOF for 
> Baytrail, then we can remove this driver altogether.
> The Atom Baytrail driver is enabled by default (default ACPI). Only when 
> we have support for Baytrail-CR can we deprecate Baytrail/Atom.
> Does this answer to your question?
> -Pierre

Thanks for explanation, Pierre. Indeed it does.
I hoped Baytrails are getting updated together with Cherrytrails, oh well.
Curtis Malainey Nov. 8, 2019, 7:24 p.m. UTC | #4
On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 9:45 AM Cezary Rojewski
<cezary.rojewski@intel.com> wrote:
>
> On 2019-11-04 22:52, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 11/4/19 2:18 PM, Cezary Rojewski wrote:
> >> On 2019-11-01 18:30, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> >>> This legacy driver is already deprecated, let's make sure there is no
> >>> conflict with SOF.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart
> >>> <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>
> >>
> >> Pierre, with SOF replacing /atom and /baytrail for BYT platforms, is
> >> /baytrail (legacy) used on any of the setups officially? While @ IGK
> >> I'm playing with anything from HSW up to TGL and above, /baytrail gets
> >> skipped entirely, even here.
> >
> > The legacy Baytrail driver is still used by Baytrail Chromebooks, and
> > that choice is not something we control. If Google transition to SOF for
> > Baytrail, then we can remove this driver altogether.
> > The Atom Baytrail driver is enabled by default (default ACPI). Only when
> > we have support for Baytrail-CR can we deprecate Baytrail/Atom.
> > Does this answer to your question?
> > -Pierre
>
> Thanks for explanation, Pierre. Indeed it does.
> I hoped Baytrails are getting updated together with Cherrytrails, oh well.
Should I get the chance, I fully intended to promote baytrail to SOF,
unfortunately I also have a lot of other projects I am balancing.
> _______________________________________________
> Alsa-devel mailing list
> Alsa-devel@alsa-project.org
> https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel

Patch
diff mbox series

diff --git a/sound/soc/intel/Kconfig b/sound/soc/intel/Kconfig
index 7e9feca333b7..d6c5c68b7499 100644
--- a/sound/soc/intel/Kconfig
+++ b/sound/soc/intel/Kconfig
@@ -65,7 +65,7 @@  config SND_SOC_INTEL_HASWELL
 
 config SND_SOC_INTEL_BAYTRAIL
 	tristate "Baytrail (legacy) Platforms"
-	depends on DMADEVICES && ACPI && SND_SST_ATOM_HIFI2_PLATFORM=n
+	depends on DMADEVICES && ACPI && SND_SST_ATOM_HIFI2_PLATFORM=n && SND_SOC_SOF_BAYTRAIL=n
 	select SND_SOC_INTEL_SST
 	select SND_SOC_INTEL_SST_ACPI
 	select SND_SOC_INTEL_SST_FIRMWARE