Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39399C05027 for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2023 15:20:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229973AbjBFPUJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Feb 2023 10:20:09 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55602 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229447AbjBFPUG (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Feb 2023 10:20:06 -0500 Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B0B95250 for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2023 07:20:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1675696805; x=1707232805; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=SmEtjgYS88GoKO+Jlag8lErD47phbH2mwUwDEnVaPJ4=; b=gaHJneD0CR7FfpluT6eOiPNUx/4G9D24MDqCKglVbMfzLal8+gZbMhb5 POmnvC9jmrFmPfenpkvGBZLlfzfuv6UsGVHlnGAwFKBXkPqBVWIV/Y7Kp LwzGn2wsqsomN4DxSXAg70USktyw8FXRlUId6J2Pv/Zox51mGF2OL+WRg ho+LKldzM3KSzI7HJrKbxD1duuB8C6rrSuRBAXrDnnza6omJP4MeUmXFB pOrWDpXGpFRY1ZD6U/tKi7xDntQiD79CMc2M+yEnuz5Z3m2UDdg+75YdE gzaw10cO6UxqeiwBWuPonKBmvzJwE/ancmjec3HkFgCdxcssuccnX2jbZ w==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10613"; a="331360734" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.97,276,1669104000"; d="scan'208";a="331360734" Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Feb 2023 07:20:04 -0800 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10613"; a="696888685" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.97,276,1669104000"; d="scan'208";a="696888685" Received: from pmagdum-mobl1.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.209.159.190]) ([10.209.159.190]) by orsmga008-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Feb 2023 07:20:03 -0800 Message-ID: <8ff49f42-95c5-dbe0-e9a4-f4982185dd63@linux.intel.com> Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2023 08:50:09 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/102.0 Thunderbird/102.4.2 Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/19] ASoC: amd: ps: create platform devices based on acp config To: "Mukunda,Vijendar" , "Limonciello, Mario" , "broonie@kernel.org" , "vkoul@kernel.org" , "alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" Cc: "Katragadda, Mastan" , "Dommati, Sunil-kumar" , "Hiregoudar, Basavaraj" , Takashi Iwai , Liam Girdwood , open list , Nathan Chancellor , "Saba Kareem, Syed" , "kondaveeti, Arungopal" , Sanyog Kale , Bard Liao References: <20230111090222.2016499-1-Vijendar.Mukunda@amd.com> <20230111090222.2016499-2-Vijendar.Mukunda@amd.com> <9f2229fb-499b-f802-993b-56a7ad2ce361@linux.intel.com> <257b6f1e-f403-573f-3978-13ffb14342ad@amd.com> <2b4c12ce-2586-0277-ede0-560f8317e4e4@linux.intel.com> <27eabbf2-eff2-0964-b72b-f9db251c3b57@amd.com> <87ddd91b-fb5f-4f27-942b-dc439b32ce20@amd.com> <2ea354bc-4263-1db6-4423-4de1b0d4e535@amd.com> <815ab487-a1a3-1978-94fc-b60e931c2848@linux.intel.com> <7b8fe2b6-84cb-e8c8-22aa-2d940a5c68b7@linux.intel.com> <9e6200ee-9b21-66d1-6bb1-832ec7399111@amd.com> <1473e1e9-b368-d8f3-c1f5-1b64e6e2ed90@linux.intel.com> <4c860ef0-d22d-5c2a-9657-7e2436b00101@amd.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Pierre-Louis Bossart In-Reply-To: <4c860ef0-d22d-5c2a-9657-7e2436b00101@amd.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >>>>>>> In above case, two manager instances will be created. >>>>>>> When manager under SWC1 scope tries to add peripheral >>>>>>> device, In sdw_slave_add() API its failing because peripheral >>>>>>> device descriptor uses link id followed by 48bit encoded address. >>>>>>> In above scenarios, both the manager's link id is zero only. So here you're reporting that the issue is that all devices use link0 ... >>>>>> what fails exactly? The device_register() ? >>>>>> >>>>>> If yes, what the issue. the device name? >>>>> device_register() is failing because of duplication of >>>>> device name. >>>>>> I wonder if we need to use something like >>>>>> >>>>>> "name shall be sdw:bus_id:link:mfg:part:class" >>>>>> >>>>>> so as to uniquify the device name, if that was the problem. >>>>> Yes correct. >>>> can you check https://github.com/thesofproject/linux/pull/4165 and see >>>> if this works for you? I tested it on Intel platforms. >>> It's working fine on our platform. As mentioned earlier in this thread, >>> we can't go with two ACPI companion device approach due to >>> limitations on windows stack for current platform. >> Thanks for testing. >> >> So if you can't go with 2 ACPI companion devices, what does the >> 'Windows' DSDT look like and how would you identify that there are two >> controllers on the platform? > We are not populating two controller devices. Instead of it, we are populating > single controller device with two independent manager instances under the same > ACPI device scope. > We have configuration register to identify sound wire manager instances on the platform. > Below is the sample DSDT for Windows & Linux. > > Scope (\_SB.ACP) >     { >      >         Device (SDWC) >         { >             Name (_ADR, 0x05)  // _ADR: Address >         Name(_DSD, Package() { >                                         ToUUID("daffd814-6eba-4d8c-8a91-bc9bbf4aa301"), >                                         Package () { >                                         Package (2) {"mipi-sdw-sw-interface-revision", 0x00010000}, >                                         Package (2) {"mipi-sdw-manager-list", 2}, >                                         }, >                                         ToUUID("dbb8e3e6-5886-4ba6-8795-1319f52a966b"), >                                         Package () { >                                         Package (2) {"mipi-sdw-link-0-subproperties", "SWM0"}, >                                         Package (2) {"mipi-sdw-link-1-subproperties", "SWM1"}, >                                         } >                                         }) // End _DSD >         Name(SWM0, Package() { >                                 ToUUID("daffd814-6eba-4d8c-8a91-bc9bbf4aa301"), >                                 Package () { >                                 Package (2) {"mipi-sdw-sw-interface-revision", 0x00010000},                                  >                                  >                                 // ... place holder for SWM0 additional properties >                                 } >                                 }) // End SWM0.SWM >        Name(SWM1,Package(){ >                 ToUUID("daffd814-6eba-4d8c-8a91-bc9bbf4aa301"), >                                 Package () { >                                 Package (2) {"mipi-sdw-sw-interface-revision", 0x00010000},                                 >                                  >                                 // ... place holder for SWM1 additional properties >                                 } >                                 }) // End SWM1.SWM > >     Device (SLV0) { // SoundWire Slave 0 >                         Name(_ADR, 0x000032025D131601) >         } // END SLV0 > >     Device (SLV1) { // SoundWire Slave 1 >                         Name(_ADR, 0x000130025D131601) >             } // END SLV1    ... but here you have two different link numbers. I interpret this as SLV0 on link0 and SLV1 on link1. So what's the issue?