Skip to content

Conversation

@lyakh
Copy link
Collaborator

@lyakh lyakh commented Apr 3, 2025

All module adapter drivers interface with the infrastructure using entries similar to

DECLARE_MODULE_ADAPTER(src_interface, SRC_UUID, src_tr); SOF_MODULE_INIT(src, sys_comp_module_src_interface_init);

which create instances of struct comp_driver and define several functions. They aren't needed when built as a LLEXT module.

All module adapter drivers interface with the infrastructure using
entries similar to

DECLARE_MODULE_ADAPTER(src_interface, SRC_UUID, src_tr);
SOF_MODULE_INIT(src, sys_comp_module_src_interface_init);

which create instances of struct comp_driver and define several
functions. They aren't needed when built as a LLEXT module.

Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski <guennadi.liakhovetski@linux.intel.com>
Copy link
Member

@lgirdwood lgirdwood left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just one open, LGTM

return 0;
}

static int demux_trigger(struct processing_module *mod, int cmd)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should this be a separate commit ?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@lgirdwood in principle it's all for the same goal - removing unused data and code from modular builds. This hunks don't change any code, they just move it around. Alternatively I could leave those functions where they are and just add #if - #endif to each of them but that would be too ugly. So, if allowed, I'd leave this as is, if however there's a strong desire for splitting this, I can do that too

@lyakh
Copy link
Collaborator Author

lyakh commented Apr 4, 2025

BTW, forgot to mention - the idea was from @softwarecki - thanks!

@lyakh
Copy link
Collaborator Author

lyakh commented Apr 4, 2025

@wszypelt "Internal Intel CI" failure seems to be unrelated?

@lyakh
Copy link
Collaborator Author

lyakh commented Apr 4, 2025

CO:

@wszypelt
Copy link

wszypelt commented Apr 4, 2025

@lyakh We have noticed a problem with this test on several PRs, we're currently analyzing it, I hope to solve it by the EOD.

Copy link
Collaborator

@softwarecki softwarecki left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good catch!

@lgirdwood lgirdwood merged commit fcfcb07 into thesofproject:main Apr 4, 2025
43 of 49 checks passed
@lyakh lyakh deleted the adapter branch April 5, 2025 08:34
@dbaluta
Copy link
Collaborator

dbaluta commented Apr 7, 2025

@lyakh this breaks a lot of tests on imx8. Looks like for example it breaks IPC3 platforms.

@lyakh
Copy link
Collaborator Author

lyakh commented Apr 22, 2025

@lyakh this breaks a lot of tests on imx8. Looks like for example it breaks IPC3 platforms.

@dbaluta do we have examples of such breakages in our CI?

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.

7 participants