Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1731974
| From | Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl_ssi: Override bit clock rate based on slot number |
| Date | 2017-09-14 01:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <upoX7-5ky-13@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <unk1z-2p0-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <uoUw2-2qj-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <up14t-6Ht-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <upaU9-4Kl-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 10:02:20AM +0200, Arnaud Mouiche wrote: > >Could you please give me a few set of examples of how you set > >set_sysclk(), set_tdm_slot() with the current driver? The idea > >here is to figure out a way to calculate the bclk in hw_params > >without getting set_sysclk() involved any more. > Here is one, where a bclk = 4*16*fs is expected > In another setup, there are 8 x 16 bits slots, whatever the number > of active channels is. > In this case bclk = 128 * fs > The number of slots is completely arbitrary. Some slots can even be > reserved for communication between codecs that don't communicate > with linux. In summary, bclk = sample rate * slots * slot_width; I will update my patch soon. > >Unfortunately, it looks like a work around to me. I understand > >the idea of leaving set_sysclk() out there to override the bit > >clock is convenient, but it is not a standard ALSA design and > >may eventually introduce new problems like today. > > I agree. I'm not conservative at all concerning this question. > I don't see a way to remove set_sysclk without breaking current TDM > users anyway, at least for those who don't have their code > upstreamed. Which TDM case would be broken by this removal? The only impact that I can see is that the ASoC core returns an ENOTSUPP for a set_sysclk() call now, which is something that a dai-link driver should have taken care of anyway. > All information provided through snd_soc_dai_set_tdm_slot( cpu_dai, > mask, mask, slots, width ) should be enough > In this case, for TDM users > > bclk = slots * width * fs (where slots is != channels) > will manage 99 % of the cases. > And the remaining 1% will concern people who need to hack the kernel > so widely they don't care about the set_sysclk removal. A patch from those people will be always welcome. > - fsl-asoc-card.c : *something will break since > snd_soc_dai_set_sysclk returned code is checked* I've already submitted a patch to ignore all ENOTSUPP.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl_ssi: Override bit clock rate based on slot number Arnaud Mouiche <arnaud.mouiche@invoxia.com> - 2017-09-12 16:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl_ssi: Override bit clock rate based on slot number Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@gmail.com> - 2017-09-12 23:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl_ssi: Override bit clock rate based on slot number Arnaud Mouiche <arnaud.mouiche@invoxia.com> - 2017-09-13 10:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl_ssi: Override bit clock rate based on slot number Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@gmail.com> - 2017-09-14 01:10 +0200
csiph-web