linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 6/6] ARM: configs: at91: sama7_defconfig: add MCHP PDMC and DMIC drivers

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:   Thu, 5 May 2022 17:07:18 +0200
From:   Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, <Codrin.Ciubotariu@...rochip.com>
CC:     <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <lars@...afoo.de>,
        <perex@...ex.cz>, <tiwai@...e.com>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/6] ARM: configs: at91: sama7_defconfig: add MCHP PDMC
 and DMIC drivers

On 05/05/2022 at 17:01, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, May 05, 2022 at 02:47:04PM +0000,Codrin.Ciubotariu@...rochip.com  wrote:
>> On 05.05.2022 16:58, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
>>> I'm fine with that, but I see that some Kconfig entries "select" this
>>> SND_SOC_DMIC directly (amd, intel, mediatek, stm).
>>> If it's absolutely needed for PDMC to work, what about doing the same as
>>> it would prevent some broken configurations?
>> The only way it makes sense to me to have this driver selected somewhere
>> is in a sound card driver, used for a specific board, which we know it
>> has PDM microphones. Since, for now, we use the simple sound card for
>> our audio interfaces, we have no place to add this select.
>> The reason I do not like to add this select under the controller driver,
>> as some of the vendors did, is because, in the future, we might have
>> different PDM microphones that might not work with SND_SOC_DMIC and
>> might need a different driver.
>> I don't have a strong opinion on this. If you think I am overthinking,
>> please let me know and I will change this.
> It's unlikely but possible that there could be some other device
> connected (eg, you could have a DSP or something that generates PDM
> output).  If the driver doesn't directly instantiate the DMIC itself
> then it's probably reasonable for it to be user controllable if the DMIC
> driver is there.

Fair enough, It makes perfect sense to me as it is then.
Thanks for the feedback!

Best regards,
   Nicolas

-- 
Nicolas Ferre