From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pierre-Louis Bossart Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 6/7] ASoC: Intel: boards: align Kconfig configurations for HiFi2 Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 10:27:19 -0600 Message-ID: References: <20171118000202.22302-1-pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com> <20171118000202.22302-7-pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com> <1511024900.25007.315.camel@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7CAF266F52 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:27:22 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <1511024900.25007.315.camel@linux.intel.com> Content-Language: en-US List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: Andy Shevchenko , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org Cc: arnd@arndb.de, tiwai@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, liam.r.girdwood@linux.intel.com, vinod.koul@intel.com, broonie@kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On 11/18/2017 11:08 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Fri, 2017-11-17 at 18:02 -0600, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: >> Make sure all the configs are aligned >> Also add the missing dependencies on SOC_ACPI stuff used to fix >> DAI names based on HID. >> >> FIXME: not sure why X86_INTEL_LPSS is needed in a machine >> driver config, should it be back to X86 everywhere? >> > X86_INTEL_LPSS makes sense only for Haswell, Broadwell, BayTrail and > CherryTrail (more precisely for PCH inside those SoCs). > > Basically it enables few peripheral drivers in case they are enumerated > via ACPI (SPI, I2C, UART, PWM, SDHCI) on SoCs listed above. > > Hope this would help how to deal with the option in ASoC case. > Yes, and my proposal would be to move this dependency where applicable in the sound/soc/intel Kconfig. the board-level dependency should only be I2C or SPI - or both in some cases, there is no reason to have something SoC-dependent at the machine level, and those cases would be filtered out anyway.