From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753092AbeFAPUC (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jun 2018 11:20:02 -0400 Received: from mga07.intel.com ([134.134.136.100]:62288 "EHLO mga07.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751465AbeFAPT6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jun 2018 11:19:58 -0400 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.49,467,1520924400"; d="scan'208";a="59571926" Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH v2 1/3] ASoC: topology: Improve backwards compatibility with v4 topology files To: Guenter Roeck , Mark Brown Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, Liam Girdwood , Takashi Iwai , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Chintan Patel , Guenter Roeck References: <1527191363-21021-1-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net> <20180601102506.GB8677@sirena.org.uk> <0015aace-fe32-9707-d3c9-0dea6f5fc48c@roeck-us.net> From: Pierre-Louis Bossart Message-ID: <8452aca6-0ae4-9fe1-c8cd-9f84e34f509f@linux.intel.com> Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 10:19:58 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0015aace-fe32-9707-d3c9-0dea6f5fc48c@roeck-us.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 6/1/18 8:17 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On 06/01/2018 03:25 AM, Mark Brown wrote: >> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 12:49:21PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: >>> From: Guenter Roeck >>> >>> Commit dc31e741db49 ("ASoC: topology: ABI - Add the types for BE >>> DAI") introduced sound topology files version 5. Initially, this >>> change made the topology code incompatible with v4 topology files. >> >> No review on these from anyone at Intel? >> > > The only actionable feedback I have seen is that the header file > changes should be in uapi, which is done in patches 2 and 3. > > Other than that, there was a question if this is a Linux issue or > a Chromebook issue (it appears that only Chromebooks shipped with > v4 configuration files). I took that as rhetorical since upstream > kernels (at least v4.4 and v4.5) support topology v4 configuration > files, and it should not matter which products shipped using those. I wanted to ack this patch but the Intel validation folks asked for a couple of days to finish their tests on a variety of Chromebooks (e.g. Lars) and double-check which models used the v4 topology. There is an internal thread on all this which remains active. I don't think the feedback will be delayed beyond early next week.