Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 9 Apr 2024 06:44:12 +0200 | Subject | Re: Fwd: Steam Deck OLED 6.8.2 nau8821-max fails | From | "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)" <> |
| |
On 09.04.24 01:44, Cristian Ciocaltea wrote: > On 4/7/24 10:47 AM, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote: >> On 06.04.24 15:08, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: >>> >>> On Bugzilla, Daniel <dmanlfc@gmail.com> reported topology regression >>> on Steam Deck OLED [1]. He wrote: > >>>> I'm adding this here, I hope it's the correct place. >>>> >>>> Currently the Steam Deck OLED fails with Kernel 6.8.2 when trying to initialise the topology for the device. >>>> I'm using the `sof-vangogh-nau8821-max.tplg` file from the Steam Deck OLED and associated firmware. >>> >>> [1]: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=218677 >> >> A quick search made me find these posts/threads that foreshadow the problem: >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231219030728.2431640-1-cristian.ciocaltea@collabora.com/ >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/a3357e1f-f354-4d4b-9751-6b2182dceea6@amd.com/ >> >> From a quick look at the second discussion it seems a bit like we are >> screwed, as iiutc topology files are out in the wild for one or the >> other approach. So we might have to bite a bullet there and accept the >> regression -- but I might easily be totally mistaken here. Would be good >> in one of the experts (Venkata Prasad Potturu maybe?) could quickly >> explain what's up here. > > The problem here is that Steam Deck OLED provides a topology file which > uses an incorrect DAI link ID for BT codec. > > Patch [1] moves BT_BE_ID to position 2 in the enum, as expected by the > topology, but this is not a change that can be accepted upstream as it > would break other devices which rely on BT_BE_ID set to 3. > > The proper solution would be to update the topology file on Steam Deck, > but this is probably not straightforward to be accomplished as it would > break the compatibility with the currently released (downstream) > kernels. > > Hopefully, this sheds some more light on the matter. > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231209205351.880797-11-cristian.ciocaltea@collabora.com/
Many thx, yes, this sheds some light on the matter. But there is one remaining question: can we make both camps happy somehow? E.g. something along the lines of "first detect if the topology file has BT_BE_ID in position 2 or 3 and then act accordingly?
Ciao, Thorsten
| |