linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] ASoC: Intel: soc-acpi-intel-tgl-match: add cs42l43 and cs35l56 support

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: <f2dec209-6bc7-49ab-9dff-57a2ca4efb03@opensource.cirrus.com>
Date:   Mon, 4 Dec 2023 15:54:35 +0000
From:   Richard Fitzgerald <rf@...nsource.cirrus.com>
To:     Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>,
        <broonie@...nel.org>, <peter.ujfalusi@...ux.intel.com>,
        <yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com>
CC:     <kai.vehmanen@...ux.intel.com>, <cezary.rojewski@...el.com>,
        <ranjani.sridharan@...ux.intel.com>, <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
        <linux-sound@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <patches@...nsource.cirrus.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] ASoC: Intel: soc-acpi-intel-tgl-match: add cs42l43 and
 cs35l56 support

On 04/12/2023 14:55, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> 
> 
> On 12/4/23 07:56, Richard Fitzgerald wrote:
>> From: Bard Liao <yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com>
>>
>> This is a test configuration for UpExtreme with Cirrus Logic
>> CS35L56-EIGHT-C board.
>>
>> The codec layout is configured as:
>>      - Link3: CS42L43 Jack
>>      - Link0: 2x CS35L56 Speaker (amps 1 and 2)
>>      - Link1: 2x CS35L56 Speaker (amps 7 and 8)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bard Liao <yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...ux.intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Richard Fitzgerald <rf@...nsource.cirrus.com>
>> ---
>> Changes since V1:
>> - Changed ALSA prefixes for CS35L56 to 'AMPn'
>> - Renumbered the CS35L56 prefixes to match the numbering of the
>>    OUTn speaker sockets on the EIGHT-C board
>> ---
>>   .../intel/common/soc-acpi-intel-tgl-match.c   | 78 +++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 78 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/sound/soc/intel/common/soc-acpi-intel-tgl-match.c b/sound/soc/intel/common/soc-acpi-intel-tgl-match.c
>> index 5804926c8b56..e5f721ba5ed4 100644
>> --- a/sound/soc/intel/common/soc-acpi-intel-tgl-match.c
>> +++ b/sound/soc/intel/common/soc-acpi-intel-tgl-match.c
> 
>> +static const struct snd_soc_acpi_adr_device cs35l56_0_adr[] = {
>> +	{
>> +		.adr = 0x00003301FA355601ull,
>> +		.num_endpoints = 1,
>> +		.endpoints = &spk_r_endpoint,
>> +		.name_prefix = "AMP1"
>> +	},
>> +	{
>> +		.adr = 0x00003201FA355601ull,
>> +		.num_endpoints = 1,
>> +		.endpoints = &spk_3_endpoint,
>> +		.name_prefix = "AMP2"
>> +	}
>> +};
>> +
>> +static const struct snd_soc_acpi_adr_device cs35l56_1_adr[] = {
>> +	{
>> +		.adr = 0x00013701FA355601ull,
>> +		.num_endpoints = 1,
>> +		.endpoints = &spk_l_endpoint,
>> +		.name_prefix = "AMP8"
>> +	},
>> +	{
>> +		.adr = 0x00013601FA355601ull,
>> +		.num_endpoints = 1,
>> +		.endpoints = &spk_2_endpoint,
>> +		.name_prefix = "AMP7"
>> +	}
>> +};
> 
> Don't we need the same change of name_prefix for
> soc-acpi-intel-mtl-match.c? I see this in the existing code:
> 

The chain that Peter sent only has CS35L56 added to tgl-match.

I've checked the history of mtl-match and the patch that added CS35L56
there was not cc'd to any cirrus.com email address so we didn't notice
it. Otherwise we would have picked this up earlier. alsa-devel is noisy.

I haven't got a MTL platform to test on but I can send a separate patch
to change mtl-match if you are happy with this prefix change.

FWIW I was going to switch to using "cs35l56-n" prefix but while editing
all our unit test cases to the new prefix I realized that's a problem if
we make similar devices with the same controls. We often make a family
of devices that have the same (or very similar) software interface - for
example CS35L41/L51 and the CS47L15/35/85/90/92/93/48L92 family. If we
use the chip ID as the prefix it would create a bogus change in the ALSA
control names even though they are the same controls. OTOH if we used
"cs35l56-n" for all cs35l56-like devices (to avoid the name change) it's
strange that there's a control named for a chip you don't have...

If it quacks like a duck it would be nice if it looks like a duck :)