Re: ASoC: Intel: sst: Missing IRQ at index 5 on BYT-T device

[Stephan Gerhold <stephan@gerhold.net>]

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 10:54:55AM -0600, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> 
> > -static int is_byt_cr(struct device *dev, bool *bytcr)
> > +static int is_byt_cr(struct platform_device *pdev, bool *bytcr)
> >   {
> > +	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> >   	int status = 0;
> > +	if (platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_IRQ, 5) == NULL) {
> > +		/* This message is even shown if the device would be detected as BYT-CR below */
> > +		dev_info(dev, "Falling back to Baytrail-CR platform\n");
> > +		*bytcr = true;
> > +		return status;
> > +	}
> > +
> >   	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IOSF_MBI)) {
> >   		u32 bios_status;
> 
> This would be my preferred solution but if it doesn't work as Hans mentions
> it then we need to think of alternatives.
> 
> Baytrail platforms are so different (BIOS and hardware) that I don't think
> we'll manage to pull this off without quirks.
> 

It definitely works on my device and the few others I have seen with 
only one IRQ listed. But there might be devices out there which are not 
covered by the pmic-type based detection but still have all 6 IRQs 
listed.

As for the "Teclast X98 Air 3G": Antonio, you mentioned that you have 
last tested mainline a few years back. Can you re-test without any 
modifications to the DSDT table on a recent mainline kernel?

I just wonder if it is really not covered by the pmic-type based 
detection. It does have quirks in mainline that were added with the pull 
request that also added the pmic-type based BYT-CR detection (see [1]).

[1]: http://mailman.alsa-project.org/pipermail/alsa-devel/2016-August/111704.html