-----Original Message----- From: Mark Brown [mailto:broonie@kernel.org] Sent: Friday, August 07, 2015 3:43 AM To: Fang, Yang A Cc: lgirdwood@gmail.com; alsa-devel@alsa-project.org; dgreid@chromium.org; Nujella, Sathyanarayana; kevin.strasser@linux.intel.com; Sripathi, Srinivas; Iriawan, Denny; Jain, Praveen K; Anish.Kumar@maximintegrated.com; Eoff, Ullysses A Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ASoC: max98090: Enforce correct device sequencing when configuring a new
On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 04:15:45PM -0700, yang.a.fang@intel.com wrote:
+static int max98090_shdn_event(struct snd_soc_dapm_widget *w,
struct snd_kcontrol *kcontrol, int event) {- struct snd_soc_codec *codec = snd_soc_dapm_to_codec(w->dapm);
- struct max98090_priv *max98090 =
snd_soc_codec_get_drvdata(codec);
- if (event & SND_SOC_DAPM_POST_PMU)
max98090->shdn_pending = TRUE;TRUE? Please use normal C99 booleans like we normally do in the kernel.
I will fix this
+static void max98090_seq_notifier(struct snd_soc_dapm_context *dapm,
- enum snd_soc_dapm_type event, int subseq, bool power_up) {
- struct snd_soc_codec *codec = snd_soc_dapm_to_codec(dapm);
- struct max98090_priv *max98090 =
snd_soc_codec_get_drvdata(codec);
- if (max98090->shdn_pending && power_up) {
snd_soc_update_bits(codec,M98090_REG_DEVICE_SHUTDOWN,
M98090_SHDNN_MASK, 0);msleep(40);snd_soc_update_bits(codec,M98090_REG_DEVICE_SHUTDOWN,
M98090_SHDNN_MASK,M98090_SHDNN_MASK);
max98090->shdn_pending = FALSE;- }
+}
Why did you change the API for this? As far as I can tell power_up is redundant here, we already know we're powering things up because we got a _PMU event, the main effect here appears to be to just run this at the next sequence point after we've powered up a widget with a shutdown event. The general concept with the seq_notifier is that we record things we need to do in the per-widget events and then implement them in the seq_notifier and I'm not seeing anything else going on here.
Thanks Mark. Right , _PMU already indicates it is power_up event.. I will drop This API change.