Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH] ASoC: SOF: Fix build error with CONFIG_SND_SOC_SOF_NOCODEC=m
From: Takashi Iwai
Date: Fri May 10 2019 - 14:07:17 EST
On Fri, 10 May 2019 19:56:51 +0200,
Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> >>>> Yes, that would work. OTOH, I see no merit to build an extra module
> >>>> for nocodec. nocodec.c can be built together with sof-core stuff.
> >> the module has its benefits. Today nocodec includes all possible DAIs,
> >> I wanted to add module parameters to restrict things a bit for
> >> tests/debug. It'll be e.g. very helpful for SoundWire to avoid
> >> exposing the SSP DAIs.
> >> Also nocodec is incompatible with hdaudio/hdmi support at the moment,
> >> we had all sorts of issues with suspend/resume.
> > Well, in the case of SOF, the core code calls directly
> > soc_nocodec_setup(), hence it's rather a direct link. So it makes
> > little sense to make the nocodec code split from sof-core, unless the
> > nocodec code is used / linked by components other than SOF. I doubt
> > the possibility because the current DAI is clearly only for SOF...
> > The module option can be still be there; it'll be applied just to
> > sof-core instead of sof-nocodec.
> I see your point and this SOF core/nocodec dependency is a conceptual
> miss on our side. Thanks for bringing our attention on this.
> The core is really supposed to be about the DSP side of things. It
> shouldn't be burdened with machine driver stuff, but it unfortunately
> is at two levels.
> Initially the nocodec code was handled at the soc-acpi-dev or
> soc-pci-dev level, and it's still there that the FORCE_CODEC mode is
> handled, along with the calls to check the codec ACPI IDs. Now when we
> enabled the HDaudio case, we somehow ended-up moving parts of the
> nocodec support in the SOF core to simplify our life but created a
> dependency that wasn't intentional at all. we collectively missed it
> while we were struggling with nocodec/hdaudio compatibility.
> The second issue is that we create a platform_device for the machine
> driver in the SOF core. This is a shortcut that we took and that works
> for Intel, but for DeviceTree-based platforms this will have to
> So long story short, I'd rather have a simple Kconfig fix to avoid
> compilation issues for now and revisit all the machine driver support,
> e.g. when the i.MX patches show up, than strengthen a dependency that
> we introduced by accident rather than by design.
OK, thanks, that's convincing enough. My proposal was just some minor
optimization, and as long as there is a planned change in future, it's
fine to leave in the current or similar form.