Re: Correct modules for Bay Trail MAX98090 soc?

[Mark Brown]

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 06:31:27PM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> On 8/11/16 3:42 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:

> > which changed the dependencies for CONFIG_SND_SOC_INTEL_BYT_MAX98090_MACH.
> > The set of options Fedora selects means that
> > CONFIG_SND_SOC_INTEL_BYT_MAX98090_MACH
> > can't be selected. Is there another driver that's supposed to replace
> > CONFIG_SND_SOC_INTEL_BYT_MAX98090_MACH on Bay Trail or do the dependencies
> > need to be updated? The bugzilla has alsa-info for working and non-
> > working cases and the Fedora config is attached.

> If you remove support for all other baytrail options this driver should
> still be there and selectable. We just can't support both this driver for
> Chromebooks and the rest for other machines with the same distribution at
> the moment.

That sounds like a regression, what's the plan to fix it.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature