linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/19] ASoC: amd: ps: create platform devices based on acp config

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: <2b4c12ce-2586-0277-ede0-560f8317e4e4@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 13 Jan 2023 11:11:10 -0600
From:   Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
To:     "Mukunda,Vijendar" <vijendar.mukunda@....com>, broonie@...nel.org,
        vkoul@...nel.org, alsa-devel@...a-project.org
Cc:     Basavaraj.Hiregoudar@....com, Sunil-kumar.Dommati@....com,
        Mario.Limonciello@....com, Mastan.Katragadda@....com,
        arungopal.kondaveeti@....com,
        Bard Liao <yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com>,
        Sanyog Kale <sanyog.r.kale@...el.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
        Syed Saba Kareem <Syed.SabaKareem@....com>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/19] ASoC: amd: ps: create platform devices based on acp
 config


>>> +		if (is_dmic_dev && is_sdw_dev) {
>>> +			switch (acp_data->sdw_master_count) {
>>> +			case 1:
>>> +				acp_data->pdev_mask = ACP63_SDW_PDM_DEV_MASK;
>>> +				acp_data->pdev_count = ACP63_SDW0_PDM_MODE_DEVS;
>>> +				break;
>>> +			case 2:
>>> +				acp_data->pdev_mask = ACP63_SDW_PDM_DEV_MASK;
>>> +				acp_data->pdev_count = ACP63_SDW0_SDW1_PDM_MODE_DEVS;
>>> +				break;
>> so the cover letter is indeed wrong and confuses two controllers for two
>> managers.
> ACP IP has two independent manager instances driven by separate controller
> each which are connected in different power domains.
> 
> we should create two separate ACPI companion devices for separate
> manager instance.  Currently we have limitations with BIOS.
> we are going with single ACPI companion device.
> We will update the changes later.

Humm, this is tricky. The BIOS interface isn't something that can be
changed at will on the kernel side, you'd have to maintain two solutions
with a means to detect which one to use.

Or is this is a temporary issue on development devices, then that part
should probably not be upstreamed.