11 Feb
2022
11 Feb
'22
4:24 p.m.
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 06:38:12PM +0800, Jiaxin Yu wrote:
Again, mostly looks good just fairly small and easily fixable issues:
+static int mtk_tdm_hd_en_event(struct snd_soc_dapm_widget *w,
struct snd_kcontrol *kcontrol,
int event)
+{
- struct snd_soc_component *cmpnt = snd_soc_dapm_to_component(w->dapm);
- dev_info(cmpnt->dev, "%s(), name %s, event 0x%x\n",
__func__, w->name, event);
- return 0;
+}
This does nothing, you can just remove it.
- switch (fmt & SND_SOC_DAIFMT_INV_MASK) {
- case SND_SOC_DAIFMT_NB_NF:
tdm_priv->bck_invert = TDM_BCK_NON_INV;
tdm_priv->lck_invert = TDM_LCK_NON_INV;
break;
- case SND_SOC_DAIFMT_NB_IF:
tdm_priv->bck_invert = TDM_BCK_NON_INV;
tdm_priv->lck_invert = TDM_LCK_INV;
break;
- case SND_SOC_DAIFMT_IB_NF:
tdm_priv->bck_invert = TDM_BCK_INV;
tdm_priv->lck_invert = TDM_LCK_NON_INV;
break;
- case SND_SOC_DAIFMT_IB_IF:
- default:
tdm_priv->bck_invert = TDM_BCK_INV;
tdm_priv->lck_invert = TDM_LCK_INV;
You should return an error in the default case rather than just picking one of the behaviours to help spot any configuration errors.
- switch (fmt & SND_SOC_DAIFMT_MASTER_MASK) {
- case SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBM_CFM:
tdm_priv->slave_mode = false;
break;
- case SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBS_CFS:
tdm_priv->slave_mode = true;
We're trying to move away from these defines and the master/slave terminology to talk about clock providers instead - the new defines are _PROVIDER_MASK, _DAIFMT_CBP_CFP and _DAIFMT_CBC_CFC.