Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH v5] ASoC:Add support for cs42l73 codec
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 09:31:50PM +0300, Georgi Vlaev wrote:
Hello,
Don't top post.
The codec has 2 basic groups of power control bits:
You're describing some features that don't sound at all unusual here... I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here?
On Oct 20, 2011, at 3:00 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 09:31:50PM +0300, Georgi Vlaev wrote:
Hello,
Don't top post.
The codec has 2 basic groups of power control bits:
You're describing some features that don't sound at all unusual here... I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here?
We have only 2 power domains. The input PCM and the output AMP. The routing between these 2 points in the codec is handled by volume levels.
Say I am routing through the XSP port to the HP. If I power the HP Amp and adjust the HP-XSP volume level, the route is then established. I could also adjust the SPK-XSP volume and power the SPK Amp to route the stream to the Speaker as well.
Given that, why would there be a need to show all routes through the mixer in a DAPM context? How do you show that?
would it look something like this?
{"HPOUT", NULL, "HP Amp"} {"HP Amp", "Amp Switch", "DAC1"} {"DAC1", "HP-XSP Volume Control", "XSPIN"}
You can represent the "HP-XSP Volume Control" control as DAPM?
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 08:26:11PM +0000, Austin, Brian wrote:
Fix your mailer to word wrap within paragraphs, I've reflowed for legibility.
We have only 2 power domains. The input PCM and the output AMP. The routing between these 2 points in the codec is handled by volume levels.
Like I say this is pretty unremarkable - the volumes are your DAPM routing controls.
Given that, why would there be a need to show all routes through the mixer in a DAPM context? How do you show that? would it look something like this?
Well, the most obvious issue is that even if your device doesn't have any useful internal power management there may be external devices connected to the outputs (eg, a high power speaker amp) which do and so we need to know which outputs are actually active in order to control the outputs.
{"HPOUT", NULL, "HP Amp"} {"HP Amp", "Amp Switch", "DAC1"} {"DAC1", "HP-XSP Volume Control", "XSPIN"}
This looks wrong, the control on the DAC looks like it actually controls just the one input path.
You can represent the "HP-XSP Volume Control" control as DAPM?
Yes.
On Oct 20, 2011, at 4:28 PM, "Mark Brown" broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 08:26:11PM +0000, Austin, Brian wrote:
Fix your mailer to word wrap within paragraphs, I've reflowed for legibility.
We have only 2 power domains. The input PCM and the output AMP. The routing between these 2 points in the codec is handled by volume levels.
Like I say this is pretty unremarkable - the volumes are your DAPM routing controls.
Given that, why would there be a need to show all routes through the mixer in a DAPM context? How do you show that? would it look something like this?
Well, the most obvious issue is that even if your device doesn't have any useful internal power management there may be external devices connected to the outputs (eg, a high power speaker amp) which do and so we need to know which outputs are actually active in order to control the outputs.
That makes sense, thanks
{"HPOUT", NULL, "HP Amp"} {"HP Amp", "Amp Switch", "DAC1"} {"DAC1", "HP-XSP Volume Control", "XSPIN"}
This looks wrong, the control on the DAC looks like it actually controls just the one input path.
That is just one example, it would be for all inputs as the mixer controls are.
You can represent the "HP-XSP Volume Control" control as DAPM?
Yes. ______
Let me rework the routes to show all inputs.
Sorry this has been such a hassle.
Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@alsa-project.org http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
{"HPOUT", NULL, "HP Amp"} {"HP Amp", "Amp Switch", "DAC1"} {"DAC1", "HP-XSP Volume Control", "XSPIN"}
This looks wrong, the control on the DAC looks like it actually controls just the one input path.
That is just one example, it would be for all inputs as the mixer controls are.
You can represent the "HP-XSP Volume Control" control as DAPM?
Yes. ______
Let me rework the routes to show all inputs.
Sorry this has been such a hassle.
I get it now! This is going to add a lot of code as there are a lot of mixer controls. Using volume controls as DAPM I can create all routes in the codec.
Thanks for the help.
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 08:23:44AM -0500, Brian Austin wrote:
I get it now! This is going to add a lot of code as there are a lot of mixer controls. Using volume controls as DAPM I can create all routes in the codec.
I did also mean to say that if you do have the really coarse power control it might be worth looking at using supply widgets to control the actual registers and no power management (SND_SOC_NOPM) for the widgets used for routing.
participants (3)
-
Austin, Brian -
Brian Austin
-
Mark Brown