+/* struct snd_soc_jack_zone - Describes voltage zones of jack detection
- @adc_value_start: start range of voltage value in adc channel
when jack is pluggedin
- @adc_value_end: end range of voltage value in adc channel
when jack is pluggedin
- @jack_type: type of jack that is expected for this voltage
- */
+struct snd_soc_jack_zone {
- unsigned int adc_value_start;
- unsigned int adc_value_end;
- unsigned int jack_type;
- struct list_head list;
+};
This is a lot better than the previous version but I think we do need to include settling time support in here. As I said before most hardware used for this isn't specialised and won't have debounce support, and in cases like detection of simple headphones on a headset jack the settling time is essential in order to distinguish between that and a headset with a microphone short button active.
I will add it as a part of this structure.
I'd also like to change adc_value_x to be {min,max}_mv or something similar for clarity, min and max are more obvious and using mv makes it clear what units are being used and that we're not working in terms of raw ADC values or similar.
I will change the names accordingly.
+static int snd_soc_validate_jack_type(int type) +{
- switch (type) {
I don't see the need for this and in any case...
I wanted to make sure that when they add a type it's a type recognized by ALSA
- case SND_JACK_HEADPHONE:
- case SND_JACK_MICROPHONE:
- case SND_JACK_HEADSET:
- case SND_JACK_LINEOUT:
- case SND_JACK_MECHANICAL:
- case SND_JACK_VIDEOOUT:
- case SND_JACK_AVOUT:
break;...this doesn't cover things like buttons implemented by shorting
I will add the buttons.
different resistances to ground.
+int snd_soc_jack_get_type(struct snd_soc_jack *jack, int micbias_voltage) +{
- struct snd_soc_jack_zone *zone;
- list_for_each_entry(zone, &jack->jack_zones, list) {
if (micbias_voltage >= zone->adc_value_start &&micbias_voltage < zone->adc_value_end)return zone->jack_type;- }
- return -ENODEV;
Returning 0 would be more helpful - that'd mean that you could just report the result straight off. However, as I said last time I do think that we should be doing something more active to manage the detection here. That's pretty essential for anything time based.
I will change the return value.
-Harsha