linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] ALSA: hda/tas2563: Add tas2563 HDA 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 6 Dec 2023 17:07:16 +0100
From:   Amadeusz Sławiński 
        <amadeuszx.slawinski@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>,
        Gergo Koteles <soyer@....hu>,
        Shenghao Ding <shenghao-ding@...com>,
        Kevin Lu <kevin-lu@...com>, Baojun Xu <baojun.xu@...com>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, alsa-devel@...a-project.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ALSA: hda/tas2563: Add tas2563 HDA driver

On 12/5/2023 6:22 PM, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> 
> 
>>>>>> +static void tas2563_fixup_i2c(struct hda_codec *cdc,
>>>>>> +	const struct hda_fixup *fix, int action)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> +	 tas2xxx_generic_fixup(cdc, action, "i2c", "INT8866");
>>>>>
>>>>> Any specific reason to use an Intel ACPI identifier? Why not use
>>>>> "TIAS2563" ?
>>>>>

Will just note that prefix should probably be TXNW (not TIAS) as 
discussed recently on list.

>>>> INT8866 is in the ACPI.
>>>> I don't know why Lenovo uses this name.
>>>> I think it's more internal than intel.
>>>>
>>>>     Scope (_SB.I2CD)
>>>>      {
>>>>          Device (TAS)
>>>>          {
>>>>              Name (_HID, "INT8866")  // _HID: Hardware ID
>>>
>>> Ouch, I hope they checked with Intel that this isn't an HID already in
>>> use...
>>>
>> It looks the INT prefix is not reserved. (yet)
>> https://uefi.org/ACPI_ID_List?acpi_search=INT
> 
> It's been de-facto reclaimed by Intel over the years, apparently using
> INTC or INTL was too hard for some of my colleagues...
> 

Perhaps it should be reserved then, so it is present on above list?

> There are lots of INT devices in the kernel today, here's a small list
> for sound/soc/codecs only
> 
> rt274.c:        { "INT34C2", 0 },
> rt286.c:        { "INT343A", 0 },
> rt298.c:        { "INT343A", 0 },
> ssm4567.c:      { "INT343B", 0 },
> 
> Those INT values were added by Intel teams though, it's really odd to
> see Lenovo use an INT-based HID. Should really use 104C2563 or something.

I will just note that those RT ones are used on quite old RVPs, and yes 
I would have also preferred if they had used "real" IDs, but it is 
unlikely that anyone fixes it after all this time ;).

Adding Andy to CC, as he commented recently about problematic 
assignments of ACPI IDs on this list, maybe he can shed some light on 
the "INT" prefix.