Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   02 Jul 2020 17:50:50 +0900
Message-ID: <875zb6z4fq.wl-kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com>
From:   Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com>
To:     Sameer Pujar <spujar@nvidia.com>
Cc:     <broonie@kernel.org>, <perex@perex.cz>, <tiwai@suse.com>,
        <robh+dt@kernel.org>, <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
        <thierry.reding@gmail.com>, <jonathanh@nvidia.com>,
        <digetx@gmail.com>, <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>,
        <linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <sharadg@nvidia.com>, <mkumard@nvidia.com>,
        <viswanathl@nvidia.com>, <rlokhande@nvidia.com>,
        <dramesh@nvidia.com>, <atalambedu@nvidia.com>,
        <nwartikar@nvidia.com>, <swarren@nvidia.com>,
        <nicoleotsuka@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 15/23] ASoC: soc-core: Identify 'no_pcm' DAI links for DPCM
In-Reply-To: <49bac9c1-093c-d353-cef3-c9c3391cc00d@nvidia.com>
References: <1593233625-14961-1-git-send-email-spujar@nvidia.com>
        <1593233625-14961-16-git-send-email-spujar@nvidia.com>
        <87h7utytlx.wl-kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com>
        <9c7871ae-6649-7b0d-4780-c8389c299b04@nvidia.com>
        <87d05ezqlc.wl-kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com>
        <49bac9c1-093c-d353-cef3-c9c3391cc00d@nvidia.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 Emacs/26.3 Mule/6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


Hi Sameer

> > I wonder component->driver->non_legacy_dai_naming can't work for you ?
> 
> I see currently in simple-card driver that, BE<->BE link would be
> treated as CODEC<->CODEC link if 'non_legacy_dai_naming' flag is set
> at both ends of BE. Do we need to set this flag for all BE?
> However I am not sure how this will work out for a BE<->BE DPCM DAI
> link considering the fact that I want to use chain of components and I
> guess routing map would get complicated. Also going by the flag name
> it was not meant to differentiate between a FE and BE?

OK, non_legacy_dai_naming was just my quick idea.

Maybe your soc_component_is_pcm() idea can work,
but it seems a littl bit hackish for me.
So, can you please

1) Add soc_component_is_pcm() on simple-card, not soc-core ?
   Maybe we can move it to soc-core later,
   but want to keep it under simple-card, so far.

2) Use it with data->component_chaining, and some comment ?
   non component_chaining user doesn't get damage in worst case,
   and easy to understand.

	/*
	 * This is for BE<->BE connection.
	 * It needs to ...
	 * It is assumng ...
	 * Note is ...
	 */
	if (data->component_chaining &&
	    !soc_component_is_pcm(cpus))
		dai_link->no_pcm = 1;

3) maybe you can reuse snd_soc_find_dai() for soc_component_is_pcm() ?

	dai = snd_soc_find_dai(dlc);
	if (dai &&
	    (dai->pcm_new || dai->component->driver->pcm_construct))
		return xxx

Thank you for your help !!

Best regards
---
Kuninori Morimoto