[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8452aca6-0ae4-9fe1-c8cd-9f84e34f509f@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 10:19:58 -0500
From: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: alsa-devel@...a-project.org, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Chintan Patel <chintan.m.patel@...el.com>,
Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH v2 1/3] ASoC: topology: Improve backwards
compatibility with v4 topology files
On 6/1/18 8:17 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 06/01/2018 03:25 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 12:49:21PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>> From: Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>
>>>
>>> Commit dc31e741db49 ("ASoC: topology: ABI - Add the types for BE
>>> DAI") introduced sound topology files version 5. Initially, this
>>> change made the topology code incompatible with v4 topology files.
>>
>> No review on these from anyone at Intel?
>>
>
> The only actionable feedback I have seen is that the header file
> changes should be in uapi, which is done in patches 2 and 3.
>
> Other than that, there was a question if this is a Linux issue or
> a Chromebook issue (it appears that only Chromebooks shipped with
> v4 configuration files). I took that as rhetorical since upstream
> kernels (at least v4.4 and v4.5) support topology v4 configuration
> files, and it should not matter which products shipped using those.
I wanted to ack this patch but the Intel validation folks asked for a
couple of days to finish their tests on a variety of Chromebooks (e.g.
Lars) and double-check which models used the v4 topology. There is an
internal thread on all this which remains active. I don't think the
feedback will be delayed beyond early next week.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists