Hey,

On 2023-08-01 18:32, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> 
>> I've been working on a small change to keep the workqueue in SOF and
>> only move the binding to the probe function to match what snd-hda-intel
>> is doing, but I don't know if that is needed?
>>
>> It was a bit unclear to me based on feedback if I should try to kill the
>> workqueue on all drivers (but with no way to test), or keep it around.
> 
> My understanding is that we only want to move the binding to the probe
> function and leave the workqueue removal for another day - possibly never.

Patch 8/9 removed the workqueue, but can be replaced by the patch below, 
that simply moves out snd_sof_probe().

I've attempted this before, but didn't have snd_sof_remove in 
snd_sof_device_remove, which is why I would get a OOPS when attempting 
to do a shutdown/reboot.

With that I hopefully addressed the last concern.

Cheers,
Maarten

This mail can be applied with git am -c.
------8<---------
Now that we can use -EPROBE_DEFER, it's no longer required to spin off
the snd_hdac_i915_init into a workqueue.

Use the -EPROBE_DEFER mechanism instead, which must be returned in the
probe function.

Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
---
  sound/soc/sof/core.c            | 19 +++++++------------
  sound/soc/sof/intel/hda-codec.c |  2 +-
  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sound/soc/sof/core.c b/sound/soc/sof/core.c
index 30db685cc5f4b..cd4d06d1800b1 100644
--- a/sound/soc/sof/core.c
+++ b/sound/soc/sof/core.c
@@ -188,13 +188,6 @@ static int sof_probe_continue(struct snd_sof_dev *sdev)
  	struct snd_sof_pdata *plat_data = sdev->pdata;
  	int ret;

-	/* probe the DSP hardware */
-	ret = snd_sof_probe(sdev);
-	if (ret < 0) {
-		dev_err(sdev->dev, "error: failed to probe DSP %d\n", ret);
-		goto probe_err;
-	}
-
  	sof_set_fw_state(sdev, SOF_FW_BOOT_PREPARE);

  	/* check machine info */
@@ -325,10 +318,6 @@ static int sof_probe_continue(struct snd_sof_dev *sdev)
  dbg_err:
  	snd_sof_free_debug(sdev);
  dsp_err:
-	snd_sof_remove(sdev);
-probe_err:
-	sof_ops_free(sdev);
-
  	/* all resources freed, update state to match */
  	sof_set_fw_state(sdev, SOF_FW_BOOT_NOT_STARTED);
  	sdev->first_boot = true;
@@ -436,6 +425,12 @@ int snd_sof_device_probe(struct device *dev, struct 
snd_sof_pdata *plat_data)

  	sof_set_fw_state(sdev, SOF_FW_BOOT_NOT_STARTED);

+	ret = snd_sof_probe(sdev);
+	if (ret) {
+		dev_err_probe(sdev->dev, ret, "failed to probe DSP\n");
+		return ret;
+	}
+
  	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SND_SOC_SOF_PROBE_WORK_QUEUE)) {
  		INIT_WORK(&sdev->probe_work, sof_probe_work);
  		schedule_work(&sdev->probe_work);
@@ -485,9 +480,9 @@ int snd_sof_device_remove(struct device *dev)

  		snd_sof_ipc_free(sdev);
  		snd_sof_free_debug(sdev);
-		snd_sof_remove(sdev);
  	}

+	snd_sof_remove(sdev);
  	sof_ops_free(sdev);

  	/* release firmware */
diff --git a/sound/soc/sof/intel/hda-codec.c 
b/sound/soc/sof/intel/hda-codec.c
index f1fd5b44aaac9..344b61576c0e3 100644
--- a/sound/soc/sof/intel/hda-codec.c
+++ b/sound/soc/sof/intel/hda-codec.c
@@ -415,7 +415,7 @@ int hda_codec_i915_init(struct snd_sof_dev *sdev)
  		return 0;

  	/* i915 exposes a HDA codec for HDMI audio */
-	ret = snd_hdac_i915_init(bus, true);
+	ret = snd_hdac_i915_init(bus, false);
  	if (ret < 0)
  		return ret;

-- 
2.39.2

On Fri, Aug 04, 2023 at 12:47:54PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> On 2023-08-01 18:32, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:

> This mail can be applied with git am -c.
> ------8<---------
> Now that we can use -EPROBE_DEFER, it's no longer required to spin off

Don't do this, it breaks my automation and means I very nearly just
skipped the patch entirely since it looked like the middle of some x86
discussion.

Hey,

Den 2023-08-04 kl. 13:59, skrev Mark Brown:
> On Fri, Aug 04, 2023 at 12:47:54PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> On 2023-08-01 18:32, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>> This mail can be applied with git am -c.
>> ------8<---------
>> Now that we can use -EPROBE_DEFER, it's no longer required to spin off
> Don't do this, it breaks my automation and means I very nearly just
> skipped the patch entirely since it looked like the middle of some x86
> discussion.

Yeah, it's replacing the patch from earlier. I can resend, but means 
having to add all acks, r-b'd, etc. :)

If you have scripts that do that, all the better.

Cheers,

~Maarten

On Fri, Aug 04, 2023 at 04:31:21PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> Den 2023-08-04 kl. 13:59, skrev Mark Brown:

> > > On 2023-08-01 18:32, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> > > This mail can be applied with git am -c.
> > > ------8<---------

> > > Now that we can use -EPROBE_DEFER, it's no longer required to spin off
> > Don't do this, it breaks my automation and means I very nearly just
> > skipped the patch entirely since it looked like the middle of some x86
> > discussion.

> Yeah, it's replacing the patch from earlier. I can resend, but means having
> to add all acks, r-b'd, etc. :)

*Defintely* do not do that:

Please don't send new patches in reply to old patches or serieses, this
makes it harder for both people and tools to understand what is going
on - it can bury things in mailboxes and make it difficult to keep track
of what current patches are, both for the new patches and the old ones.

> If you have scripts that do that, all the better.

If you're using b4 then b4 trailers --update.