Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 31 Aug 2022 12:19:10 +0300 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/6] ASoC: codecs: wsa-macro: add support for sm8450 and sc8280xp | From | Krzysztof Kozlowski <> |
| |
On 31/08/2022 12:17, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: > > > On 18/08/2022 18:12, Rob Herring wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 02:46:15PM +0100, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: >>> Add compatible for sm8450 and sc8280xp. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> >>> --- >>> sound/soc/codecs/lpass-wsa-macro.c | 2 ++ >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/sound/soc/codecs/lpass-wsa-macro.c b/sound/soc/codecs/lpass-wsa-macro.c >>> index 27da6c6c3c5a..f82c297ea3ab 100644 >>> --- a/sound/soc/codecs/lpass-wsa-macro.c >>> +++ b/sound/soc/codecs/lpass-wsa-macro.c >>> @@ -2561,6 +2561,8 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops wsa_macro_pm_ops = { >>> static const struct of_device_id wsa_macro_dt_match[] = { >>> {.compatible = "qcom,sc7280-lpass-wsa-macro"}, >>> {.compatible = "qcom,sm8250-lpass-wsa-macro"}, >>> + {.compatible = "qcom,sm8450-lpass-wsa-macro"}, >>> + {.compatible = "qcom,sc8280xp-lpass-wsa-macro" }, >> >> Looks like these are backwards compatible with the existing versions, >> why not reflect that in the binding? > Backward compatibility is not always true, some of the registers and > there defaults tend to change across SoCs. Having SoC specific > compatible could help us deal with this and also make code more inline > with other codec macros in LPASS IP.
I am not saying that there should be no SoC specific compatible. This one is a must, but the question why duplicating the entries and not using fallback?
Best regards, Krzysztof
| |