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

[Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1076 bytes --]

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 07:03:31PM +0100, Stephan Gerhold wrote:

> Side note:
> I have considered fixing this in the DSDT table a few times before but 
> have never tried it because it kind of feels wrong to me. It would 
> probably work, but I believe the kernel is at fault here:

> I've been fixing mistakes and adding missing GPIOs to the DSDT, but is 
> this really the case here? Everything that is needed for the driver 
> exists in the ACPI table. If this was a BYT-CR device, it would work 
> as-is, with no additional modifications.

> Now, in order to fulfill the current expectations for BYT-T devices,
> I would need to add 4 additional IRQs that would never be used.
> But which IRQs would I list there? Dummy/invalid IRQs? To me, that
> does not sound like the DSDT will become any more valid.

> Let me know what you think! :)

This thread appears to have died without a conclusion I can see?  I
don't have strong feelings here, it seems like it's a choice between
different evils so people working on the platform should make the call.

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 0 bytes --]