Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 9 Apr 2024 12:55:00 +0300 | Subject | Re: Fwd: Steam Deck OLED 6.8.2 nau8821-max fails | From | Cristian Ciocaltea <> |
| |
On 4/9/24 12:19 PM, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote: > On 09.04.24 10:47, Cristian Ciocaltea wrote: >> On 4/9/24 11:04 AM, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote: >>> On 09.04.24 09:42, Cristian Ciocaltea wrote: >>>> On 4/9/24 7:44 AM, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote: >>>>> On 09.04.24 01:44, Cristian Ciocaltea wrote: >>>>>> On 4/7/24 10:47 AM, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote: >>>>>>> On 06.04.24 15:08, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: >>>>>>>> On Bugzilla, Daniel <dmanlfc@gmail.com> reported topology regression >>>>>>>> on Steam Deck OLED [1]. He wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'm adding this here, I hope it's the correct place. >>>>>>>>> Currently the Steam Deck OLED fails with Kernel 6.8.2 when trying to initialise the topology for the device. >>>>>>>>> I'm using the `sof-vangogh-nau8821-max.tplg` file from the Steam Deck OLED and associated firmware. >>>>>>>> [1]: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=218677 >>>>>>> A quick search made me find these posts/threads that foreshadow the problem: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231219030728.2431640-1-cristian.ciocaltea@collabora.com/ >>>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/a3357e1f-f354-4d4b-9751-6b2182dceea6@amd.com/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> From a quick look at the second discussion it seems a bit like we are >>>>>>> screwed, as iiutc topology files are out in the wild for one or the >>>>>>> other approach. So we might have to bite a bullet there and accept the >>>>>>> regression -- but I might easily be totally mistaken here. Would be good >>>>>>> in one of the experts (Venkata Prasad Potturu maybe?) could quickly >>>>>>> explain what's up here. >>>>>> >>>>>> The problem here is that Steam Deck OLED provides a topology file which >>>>>> uses an incorrect DAI link ID for BT codec. >>>>>> >>>>>> Patch [1] moves BT_BE_ID to position 2 in the enum, as expected by the >>>>>> topology, but this is not a change that can be accepted upstream as it >>>>>> would break other devices which rely on BT_BE_ID set to 3. >>>>>> >>>>>> The proper solution would be to update the topology file on Steam Deck, >>>>>> but this is probably not straightforward to be accomplished as it would >>>>>> break the compatibility with the currently released (downstream) >>>>>> kernels. >>>>>> >>>>>> Hopefully, this sheds some more light on the matter. >>>>>> >>>>>> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231209205351.880797-11-cristian.ciocaltea@collabora.com/ >>>>> >>>>> Many thx, yes, this sheds some light on the matter. But there is one >>>>> remaining question: can we make both camps happy somehow? E.g. something >>>>> along the lines of "first detect if the topology file has BT_BE_ID in >>>>> position 2 or 3 and then act accordingly? >>>> >>>> Right, I have this on my TODOs list but haven't managed to dig into it >>>> yet. However, that would be most likely just another hack to be carried >>>> on until the transition to a fixed topology is completed. >>> >>> Well, sure it's a hack, but the thing is, our number one rule is "no >>> regressions" and the reporter apparently faces one (see start of the >>> thread). So to fulfill this rule it would be ideal to have a fix >>> available soonish or revert the culprit and reply it later together with >>> the fix. >> >> Hmm, unless I'm missing something, this shouldn't been considered a >> regression. As I explained previously, the OLED model was launched with >> a downstream implementation of the Vangogh SOF drivers on top of v6.1, >> as there was no upstream support back then. >> >> When AMD eventually completed the upstreaming process of their SOF >> drivers in v6.6, we ended up with this unfortunate ID assignments >> incompatibility. Hence I cannot see how the mainline kernel would have >> worked without applying patch [1] above, unless the reporter >> experimented with a different topology (which is not the case if I got >> this right). >> >>> Do we know which change that went into 6.8 caused this? Or is a revert >>> out-of-the question as it will likely break things for other users that >>> already upgraded to 6.8 and have a matching topology file? (/me fears >>> the answer to the latter question is "yes", but I have to ask :-/) >> >> We need to understand how the reporter got this working with mainline >> kernels without applying any out-of-tree patches. > > Ahh, okay, thx, now I understand this better. You are most likely > correct. It also made me look at the initial report again where I > noticed "When *I manually patched support* for the 6.6 or 6.7 mainline > kernel it worked fine.", so yes, this likely is not a regression.
It would be interesting to find out what the *manually patched support* involved. FWIW, to get audio working with v6.8, it's also necessary to backport several patches from v6.9-rc1 - I would consider the following:
Fixes: f0f1021fc9cb ("ASoC: amd: acp: Drop redundant initialization of machine driver data") Fixes: 68ab29426d88 ("ASoC: amd: acp: Make use of existing *_CODEC_DAI macros") Fixes: d0ada20279db ("ASoC: amd: acp: Add missing error handling in sof-mach") Fixes: 222be59e5eed ("ASoC: SOF: amd: Fix memory leak in amd_sof_acp_probe()") Fixes: a13f0c3c0e8f ("ASoC: SOF: amd: Optimize quirk for Valve Galileo") Fixes: 369b997a1371 ("ASoC: SOF: core: Skip firmware test for custom loaders") Fixes: d9cacc1a2af2 ("ASoC: SOF: amd: Compute file paths on firmware load") Fixes: 33c3d8133307 ("ASoC: SOF: amd: Move signed_fw_image to struct acp_quirk_entry") Fixes: 094d11768f74 ("ASoC: SOF: amd: Skip IRAM/DRAM size modification for Steam Deck OLED")
I think most if not all of the mandatory fixes from the list above have been already included in the latest v6.8 stable updates, but I haven't actually tested.
> > Thx for your help and sorry for the trouble I caused!
No problem at all!
Regards, Cristian
| |