linux-kernel - Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH 1/7] ASoC: mediatek: Refine mt8173 driver and change config option

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 5 May 2016 10:32:17 +0200
From:	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>
To:	Garlic Tseng <garlic.tseng@...iatek.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:	alsa-devel@...a-project.org, ir.lian@...iatek.com,
	srv_heupstream@...iatek.com, tiwai@...e.de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, koro.chen@...iatek.com,
	linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, PC.Liao@...iatek.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH 1/7] ASoC: mediatek: Refine mt8173 driver and
 change config option



On 05/05/16 04:45, Garlic Tseng wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-05-04 at 17:43 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 09:00:42PM +0800, Garlic Tseng wrote:
>>
>>>   .../{mtk-afe-pcm.c => mt8173/mt8173-afe-pcm.c}     | 488 ++++++++++-----------
>>
>> So there's going to be no code sharing at all between this and any other
>> Mediatek chips?  That seems very surprising, it'd suggest that the
>> hardware designers were creating a new design completely from scratch
>> each time which doesn't seem all that likely.  This is an unusual way of
>> organizing things and we need a much clearer explanation of what's going
>> on here.
>
> MT8173 and MT2701 are from different product lines so the register
> control sequences are very different. If another driver for 8173-like
> (or 2701-like) chip go upstream it shall share some common code with the
> relatively driver indeed. However I think MT8173 and MT2701 can't share
> the platform driver or a lot of "if MT8173 else MT2701" will mess up the
> code.
>

What about the other SoCs we have some minimal support for: mt6589, 
mt8135, mt6592, mt6580, mt7323, mt8127?

A quick glance at the datasheets showed me, that mt6589 and at least 
mt8127 have quite similar register offsets. So I suppose there is some 
common code actually.

Regards,
Matthias