Skip to content

ASoC: Intel: soc-acpi-intel-nvl-match: Set get_function_tplg_files for rt722 #5595

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
ujfalusi wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

ASoC: Intel: soc-acpi-intel-nvl-match: Set get_function_tplg_files for rt722 #5595

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 2 additions & 0 deletions sound/soc/intel/common/soc-acpi-intel-nvl-match.c
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@

#include <sound/soc-acpi.h>
#include <sound/soc-acpi-intel-match.h>
#include "sof-function-topology-lib.h"
#include "soc-acpi-intel-sdw-mockup-match.h"

struct snd_soc_acpi_mach snd_soc_acpi_intel_nvl_machines[] = {
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -84,6 +85,7 @@ struct snd_soc_acpi_mach snd_soc_acpi_intel_nvl_sdw_machines[] = {
.links = nvl_rt722_l3,
.drv_name = "sof_sdw",
.sof_tplg_filename = "sof-nvl-rt722.tplg",
.get_function_tplg_files = sof_sdw_get_tplg_files,
Copy link
Collaborator

@bardliao bardliao Nov 20, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I am thinking if we want to create "sof-nvl-rt722.tplg" or set .sof_tplg_filename = "sof-nvl-dummy.tplg", to always use the function topology?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@ujfalusi ujfalusi Nov 20, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

we can drop this config match and that would force "sof-nvl-dummy.tplg", but you will need #5596 first as if the device have BT link (tested on LNL laptop) then we will fail to probe.
The monolithic topology does not have BT link, so it probes, but with dummy we don't have a fallback path and we stop due to missing fragment for BT

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@ujfalusi ujfalusi Nov 20, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

v2 had reverted this match, but found out that it can break the audio, so decided to do this in smaller steps?
Or we can try to send the two patch for 6.19 via ALSA on top of the NVL-S support, but I'm not sure if I want to test my luck with Iwai-san, that would be the best solution to be honest:
revert 41566e3 ("ASoC: Intel: soc-acpi-intel-nvl-match: add rt722 l3 support") and send #5596 as one series so we will have no monolithic topologies for NVL...

Copy link
Collaborator

@bardliao bardliao Nov 20, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

v2 had reverted this match, but found out that it can break the audio, so decided to do this in smaller steps? Or we can try to send the two patch for 6.19 via ALSA on top of the NVL-S support, but I'm not sure if I want to test my luck with Iwai-san, that would be the best solution to be honest: revert 41566e3 ("ASoC: Intel: soc-acpi-intel-nvl-match: add rt722 l3 support") and send #5596 as one series so we will have no monolithic topologies for NVL...

Yes, it sounds the best solution to me.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@ujfalusi ujfalusi Nov 20, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yeah, but will that apply on top of sound tree or needs patches from ASoC...
I can check, but if that is the case then we should send this patch for 6.19 and remove the whole match thing for 6.20

},
{},
};
Expand Down
Loading