[alsa-devel] [PATCH] ASoC: wm8804: Allow fine-grained control of the PLL generation

Mark Brown broonie at kernel.org
Thu Jan 9 18:23:50 CET 2014

On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 09:14:07AM -0800, Trent Piepho wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 7:29 AM, Daniel Matuschek <daniel at matuschek.net> wrote:

Daniel, please take more care with the CC lists when posting things -
there's nothing to do with device tree in this patch but you've CCed the
DT list and some DT people  wich means more noise in their mailbox.

> Why does it need to be an option?  If 256x is better, then why not
> always use it?  Maybe the code to select the divisor should be better?

It's typically a power/performance tradeoff, though for this part I
can't see anyone caring about power.

> Since it stops at the first divisor that works, won't it always use
> mclkdiv=1?  If mclkdiv=0 is better, why not just list those first/only
> in the table so they get used?

This seems like the best idea.  I suspect the table just got typed in
from the datasheet.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.alsa-project.org/pipermail/alsa-devel/attachments/20140109/c12fc743/attachment.sig>

More information about the Alsa-devel mailing list