On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 10:37:51AM +0900, Sangbeom Kim wrote:
- soc_pcm_ops = kzalloc(sizeof(*soc_pcm_ops), GFP_KERNEL);
- if (soc_pcm_ops == NULL) {
snd_printk(KERN_ERR "Cannot allocate PCM OPS\n");return -ENOMEM;- }
This patch is good and fixes a real problem but can you please change it slightly so that instead of dynamically allocating the soc_pcm_ops we just embed it directly in the runtime structure. Since every runtime needs an ops structure we may as well just have it embedded directly and not write the allocation, freeing and error handling code.
Hi, I'm Sangsu Park. (sangsu4u.park@samsung.com) I'm using gmail because of company's firewall problems...
I've implement your guide like follows.
//-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- struct snd_soc_dai *codec_dai = rtd->codec_dai; struct snd_soc_dai *cpu_dai = rtd->cpu_dai; + struct snd_pcm_ops *soc_pcm_ops = platform->driver->ops; struct snd_pcm *pcm; char new_name[64]; int ret = 0, playback = 0, capture = 0;
if (playback) - snd_pcm_set_ops(pcm, SNDRV_PCM_STREAM_PLAYBACK, &soc_pcm_ops); + snd_pcm_set_ops(pcm, SNDRV_PCM_STREAM_PLAYBACK, soc_pcm_ops);
if (capture) - snd_pcm_set_ops(pcm, SNDRV_PCM_STREAM_CAPTURE, &soc_pcm_ops); + snd_pcm_set_ops(pcm, SNDRV_PCM_STREAM_CAPTURE, soc_pcm_ops); --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------//
But, it seems to make mutex dead lock. When starting playback, it tells some messages.
//-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- # aplay -twav Test.wav INFO: task aplay:1071 blocked for more than 120 seconds. "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message. aplay D c01d1ba4 0 1071 1051 0x00000000 [<c01d1ba4>] (__schedule+0x244/0x6cc) from [<c01d2db0>] (__mutex_lock_slowpath+0x180/0x360) [<c01d2db0>] (__mutex_lock_slowpath+0x180/0x360) from [<c01d2f9c>] (mutex_lock+0xc/0x24) [<c01d2f9c>] (mutex_lock+0xc/0x24) from [<c01c10c4>] (soc_pcm_open+0x38/0x48c) [<c01c10c4>] (soc_pcm_open+0x38/0x48c) from [<c01c1114>] (soc_pcm_open+0x88/0x48c) [<c01c1114>] (soc_pcm_open+0x88/0x48c) from [<c01b0fcc>] (snd_pcm_open_substream+0x60/0xa0) [<c01b0fcc>] (snd_pcm_open_substream+0x60/0xa0) from [<c01b1134>] (snd_pcm_open+0x128/0x270) [<c01b1134>] (snd_pcm_open+0x128/0x270) from [<c01a4034>] (snd_open+0x130/0x2ec) [<c01a4034>] (snd_open+0x130/0x2ec) from [<c00b00e4>] (chrdev_open+0x10c/0x1f0) [<c00b00e4>] (chrdev_open+0x10c/0x1f0) from [<c00aad24>] (__dentry_open+0x220/0x328) [<c00aad24>] (__dentry_open+0x220/0x328) from [<c00aaef4>] (nameidata_to_filp+0x60/0x68) [<c00aaef4>] (nameidata_to_filp+0x60/0x68) from [<c00bb5d4>] (do_last+0x214/0xcc0) [<c00bb5d4>] (do_last+0x214/0xcc0) from [<c00bc13c>] (path_openat+0xbc/0x3a8) [<c00bc13c>] (path_openat+0xbc/0x3a8) from [<c00bc510>] (do_filp_open+0x30/0x84) [<c00bc510>] (do_filp_open+0x30/0x84) from [<c00aa954>] (do_sys_open+0xe4/0x184) [<c00aa954>] (do_sys_open+0xe4/0x184) from [<c000f3c0>] (ret_fast_syscall+0x0/0x30) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------//
"sound/core/" uses soc_pcm_ops using substream->ops, and "sound/soc/" uses soc_pcm_ops using platform->driver->ops. So, I think that they must have their own soc_pcm_ops object. How do you think about this?