Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230628102621.15016-1-srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>
 <20230628102621.15016-3-srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> <f71c8d2b-d5f4-42bb-932f-5b9ec6117ffc@sirena.org.uk>
 <73dce263-bee6-554f-9eb6-af4aa7badab1@linaro.org> <c377aefe-2678-4ba7-96b3-2186e8f3f1b4@sirena.org.uk>
 <fabef33c-a8c7-af61-80b4-91e55081c977@linaro.org> <c5bbdaa9-43fb-4ec3-af7d-b1629d2d88f7@sirena.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <c5bbdaa9-43fb-4ec3-af7d-b1629d2d88f7@sirena.org.uk>
From:   Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 28 Jun 2023 23:00:54 +0300
Message-ID: <CAA8EJprRH6aFj17A-sJzzHJXG7vNWu-yznSh7oA3WBXRv19wvw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] ASoC: qcom: q6apm: add support for reading firmware
 name from DT
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc:     Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, andersson@kernel.org,
        robh+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, johan+linaro@kernel.org,
        perex@perex.cz, tiwai@suse.com, lgirdwood@gmail.com,
        ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com, kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com,
        alsa-devel@alsa-project.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 28 Jun 2023 at 22:40, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 10:33:16PM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > On 28/06/2023 21:10, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > If the goal here is to put all the firmwares for a given board in a
> > > single place surely it would be better to factor this all out of the
> > > individual drivers so that they ask some helper for a directory to use
> > > for firmware?  Adding these device specific firmware node properties
> > > doesn't seem to follow.
>
> > This quickly becomes overcomplicated. Some platforms use different firmware
> > naming structure. Some firmware goes into a generic location and other files
> > go into device-specific location. So having a generic helper doesn't really
> > help.
>
> That sounds like a job for symlinks surely?

Excuse me, but I don't understand the goal for such symlinks. In my
opinion (and more importantly, in the opinion of qcom maintainers),
firmware-name does the necessary job. It provides enough flexibility
and doesn't require any additional dances around.


-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry