From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F0B4C433EF for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2021 09:42:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D30886112F for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2021 09:42:42 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org D30886112F Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=mediatek.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To: Date:CC:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=Vv2dfu9o1+cBF6x3sBgYj+I7LT7baA+BtvL4imPxeN4=; b=qt/IMMXDKnScQp 0isvjcStvl6e+p/lV0pVaIYqnj5cDNiS5fEfc6F4JsqXQH6M4CeKDMqtzxGAbZMBeZ7PUF2BWqrpm Xx6PYwYLB5SXmO0ugD1JC8dqNY/Vr6J4HZhwb2B+vQxwd8L0R5vyPUSxj3zwmNEjKDhYkB5xykeE7 6rR6ICsolU7gXhmwtCOja/AIrzGG5poKclmQrmDEZB4dljXSOx2RlaWTuAJDjyrLEvC2cBxu5sCOK VbjWeRsVgq0I+5sraBYpG+fcrGKUj+Ysfdmn2PKrZHKFPpACQHwWyqE52uRT9paMkErxhA8ucnnd+ XOlV2pUtuRZssBgFkjpw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mk19S-00Fv85-IK; Mon, 08 Nov 2021 09:41:18 +0000 Received: from mailgw02.mediatek.com ([216.200.240.185]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mk19C-00Fv4O-VW; Mon, 08 Nov 2021 09:41:09 +0000 X-UUID: 8be3ca8f9c18411399f0390ba585273c-20211108 X-UUID: 8be3ca8f9c18411399f0390ba585273c-20211108 Received: from mtkcas68.mediatek.inc [(172.29.94.19)] by mailgw02.mediatek.com (envelope-from ) (musrelay.mediatek.com ESMTP with TLSv1.2 ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 256/256) with ESMTP id 357901384; Mon, 08 Nov 2021 02:40:58 -0700 Received: from mtkmbs10n1.mediatek.inc (172.21.101.34) by MTKMBS62N1.mediatek.inc (172.29.193.41) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Mon, 8 Nov 2021 01:40:57 -0800 Received: from mtkmbs10n1.mediatek.inc (172.21.101.34) by mtkmbs10n1.mediatek.inc (172.21.101.34) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.792.15; Mon, 8 Nov 2021 17:40:52 +0800 Received: from mtksdccf07 (172.21.84.99) by mtkmbs10n1.mediatek.inc (172.21.101.73) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 15.2.792.15 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 8 Nov 2021 17:40:52 +0800 Message-ID: <4e876c89ee58cd1408511a34573005e3df359cd0.camel@mediatek.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] ASoC: mediatek: mt8195: separate the common code from machine driver From: YC Hung To: Mark Brown , Pierre-Louis Bossart CC: Trevor Wu , , , , , , , , , Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2021 17:40:52 +0800 In-Reply-To: References: <20211103100040.11933-1-trevor.wu@mediatek.com> <20211103100040.11933-4-trevor.wu@mediatek.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5-0ubuntu0.18.04.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MTK: N X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20211108_014103_090204_2D490E96 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 35.39 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Hi Mark, I am YC Hung from Mediatek. Let me show our block diagram as the link below for the sound card which support SOF. https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/62316/132476344-923dfe3a-5305-43e5-9fc8-c63d9ab2c58f.png In this sound card, there are two components , one is SOF based component and another is non-SOF based component(called Normal in the block). We want to reuse some BEs of Normal which can control Mediatek Audio Front End hardware power, clock , and DAI module and still keep some FEs(e.g. DPTX) then we can use it on the same sound card. Therefore, we use late_probe callback function "mt8195_mt6359_rt1019_rt5682_card_late_probe" to add route path from SOF widget to non-SOF BEs. For two patches https://github.com/thesofproject/linux/pull/3217 and https://github.com/thesofproject/linux/pull/3236, we want to keep FEs of non-SOF components and can reuse them. Please let me know if I am not clear enough.Thanks. On Fri, 2021-11-05 at 16:41 +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > On Fri, Nov 05, 2021 at 11:16:05AM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: > > On 11/5/21 10:38 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > > We shouldn't be requiring people to load completely different > > > drivers > > > based on software configuration, what if a system wants to bypass > > > the > > > DSP in some but not all configurations? Can we not just have > > > controls > > > allowing users to route round the DSP where appropriate? > > It was my understanding the card relies on separate components > > - a SOF-based component to provide support for DSP-managed > > interfaces > > - a 'non-SOF' component for 'regular' interfaces not handled by the > > DSP. > > this was the basis for the changes discussed in > > https://github.com/thesofproject/linux/pull/3217 and > > https://github.com/thesofproject/linux/pull/3236 > > So it's actually supposed to end up as two different cards which > can't > possibly be interlinked? That doesn't seem to add up entirely given > that there's stuff being moved out of the current card, and I thought > these systems had a fairly comprehensive audio muxing capability. > Trevor, could you be a bit more specific about what's actually going > on > here physically please? > > > But indeed if the same interface can be managed by the DSP or not, > > depending on software choices it's a different problem altogether. > > We've looked into this recently, if the choice to involve the DSP > > or not > > is at the interface level, it might be better to have both > > components > > expose different DAIs for the same interface, with some sort of > > run-time > > mutual exclusion, so that all possible/allowed permutations are > > allowed. > > Yes, if the interface can optionally be completely hidden by the DSP > that's adding another layer of complication. > _______________________________________________ > Linux-mediatek mailing list > Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel