[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <875y6g5feo.wl-tiwai@suse.de>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2023 13:06:39 +0200
From: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
To: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Kai Vehmanen <kai.vehmanen@...ux.intel.com>,
Alsa-devel <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
sound-open-firmware@...a-project.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
Cezary Rojewski <cezary.rojewski@...el.com>,
Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>,
Liam Girdwood <liam.r.girdwood@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...ux.intel.com>,
Bard Liao <yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com>,
Ranjani Sridharan <ranjani.sridharan@...ux.intel.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Daniel Baluta <daniel.baluta@....com>,
Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] ASoC: SOF: Intel: Remove deferred probe for SOF
On Wed, 19 Jul 2023 11:48:06 +0200,
Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>
> The 60 seconds timeout is a thing "better than complete disablement",
> so it's not ideal, either. Maybe we can add something like the
> following:
>
> - Check when the deferred probe takes too long, and warn it
> - Provide some runtime option to disable the component binding, so
> that user can work around it if needed
>
> A module option to snd_hdac_i915_init would probably be the least of all evils
> here.
Yes, probably it's the easiest option and sufficient.
thanks,
Takashi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists