linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: tas2562: Add firmware support for tas2563

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]

Message-ID: <414a2d73-6d09-1e76-59c8-4943c0e8f720@ti.com>
Date:   Tue, 9 Jun 2020 13:06:50 -0500
From:   Dan Murphy <dmurphy@...com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC:     <lgirdwood@...il.com>, <perex@...ex.cz>, <tiwai@...e.com>,
        <robh@...nel.org>, <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: tas2562: Add firmware support for
 tas2563

Mark

On 6/9/20 12:58 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 12:35:50PM -0500, Dan Murphy wrote:
>> On 6/9/20 12:31 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> Why not just use a standard name for the firmware?  If the firmwares
>>> vary per-board then building it using the machine compatible (or DMI
>>> info) could handle that, with a fallback to a standard name for a
>>> default setup.
>> The number of firmwares can vary per IC on the board itself.  So you may
>> have X number of firmware files all with different names all targets for
>> different TAS2563 ICs.
>> Also TI will not be providing the individual binaries to the customer.
>> There is a customer tool that the user uses to create the binaries.
>> So the output names are arbitrary.
>> I was going to mention this in the cover letter but did not think mentioning
>> the user tool had any value
> That's all fairly standard for this sort of device.  You could still
> cope with this by including the I2C address in the default name
> requested - do something like tas2562/myboard-addr.fw or whatever.  The
> concern here is that someone shouldn't have to replace their DT if they
> decide they want to start using the DSP, and someone making a distro
> shouldn't be stuck dealing with what happens if multiple vendors decide
> to just reuse the same name (eg, just calling everything tas2562
> regardless of plastics).

I could make a default as you suggested to include i2c address and bus 
in the name.  But the TAS2563 does not need the firmware to operate and 
the 2562 does not have a DSP.

What if there was an ALSA control instead that passed in the firmware 
name from the user space instead of using the DT?

Then the control can load and parse the firmware and wait for the user 
to select the program.

This would solve a user from having ot update the DT to use a firmware.

Dan