linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] ASoC: tegra: Add RT5631 machine driver

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 2 Feb 2021 17:00:49 +0000
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
Cc:     Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>,
        Ion Agorria <AG0RRIA@...oo.com>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Svyatoslav Ryhel <clamor95@...il.com>,
        Ion Agorria <ion@...rria.com>, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] ASoC: tegra: Add RT5631 machine driver

On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 04:24:31PM +0000, Jon Hunter wrote:
> On 02/02/2021 15:25, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:

> > These codecs require individual configurations and those
> > "../codecs/rt5631.h" and  "../codecs/rt5677.h" aren't compatible at a
> > quick glance.

> Right but not all of that is needed. What is actually needed from the
> header files?

Right, and if it's just a case of having a different hw_params() or
something then the majority of the driver could be shared with just a
few bits being handled differently.

> > The tegra_rt5677 also uses outdated GPIO API and etc. Hence the new
> > driver should be a better base anyways.

> Sounds like a good time to update it :-)

Yeah.

> > Overall it shouldn't worth time and effort trying to squeeze these
> > drivers into a single one, IMO.

> Not sure I agree when these drivers appear to be 90% the same.

It's certainly worth considering - given that it's the same silicon
vendor working with the same SoC vendor's reference designs it seems
likely that things will look pretty similar at the system integration
level.  It's possible that it's more trouble than it's worth but it'd be
good to have a more concrete understanding of why.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)