Skip to content

Topology for CML da7219-max98357a - #2314

Closed
kumarsac wants to merge 1 commit into
thesofproject:cml-008-patch-backportfrom
kumarsac:push-test
Closed

kumarsac wants to merge 1 commit into
thesofproject:cml-008-patch-backportfrom
kumarsac:push-test

Conversation

@kumarsac

Copy link
Copy Markdown

sof-cml-da7219-max98357a topology is merged only in the cml-007-stable-drop branch. And not pushed to master.

  1. Cherrypicked the topology from cml-007-stable-drop and resolved conflict.
  2. Fix the Macro Syntax change for topology as per the commit 77b6db8 ("topology: enable pcm range and pipeline rate and remove frame count")

Comment thread tools/topology/CMakeLists.txt Outdated

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

maybe a dumb question, but this machine driver is shared with glk_da7219_max98357a, so can't we share the same topology file and use variables to adjust SSP values?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This commit i have cherry picked from cml-007-drop-stable branch. (05c8e96).
This topology file is the one which is used in the SOF 007 release.
@macchian could you please comment on this ?.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Per request, reuse the glk topology and update new PR #2397 for reviewing.

refer to 0.4 topology file, migrate to 0.7 by adding supports:
1. dmic16k capture
2. 48KHz speaker playback by m/n divider
3. remove warning widgets messages

Signed-off-by: Mac Chiang <mac.chiang@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Sachin Kumar <sachin.kumar@intel.com>
@jajanusz

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@kumarsac @lgirdwood Is this PR still valid. Do we use that backport branch?

@kumarsac

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@kumarsac @lgirdwood Is this PR still valid. Do we use that backport branch?

This PR can be closed as its been taken care in : #2397

@kumarsac kumarsac closed this Mar 25, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants