[alsa-devel] [PATCH 1/2] mfd: wm5102: Update register patch
Update the register patch based on latest evaluation of the device.
Signed-off-by: Charles Keepax ckeepax@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com --- drivers/mfd/wm5102-tables.c | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mfd/wm5102-tables.c b/drivers/mfd/wm5102-tables.c index 1e9a4b2..f9b1e96 100644 --- a/drivers/mfd/wm5102-tables.c +++ b/drivers/mfd/wm5102-tables.c @@ -73,6 +73,7 @@ static const struct reg_default wm5102_revb_patch[] = { { 0x171, 0x0000 }, { 0x35E, 0x000C }, { 0x2D4, 0x0000 }, + { 0x4DC, 0x0900 }, { 0x80, 0x0000 }, };
Evaluation of the device has given some settings to improve the ultrasonic frequency response. This patch allows the user the option of applying those.
Signed-off-by: Charles Keepax ckeepax@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com --- include/linux/mfd/arizona/pdata.h | 3 +++ sound/soc/codecs/arizona.c | 15 +++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/arizona/pdata.h b/include/linux/mfd/arizona/pdata.h index 12a5c13..3df0ed5 100644 --- a/include/linux/mfd/arizona/pdata.h +++ b/include/linux/mfd/arizona/pdata.h @@ -177,6 +177,9 @@ struct arizona_pdata { /** Mode for outputs */ bool out_mono[ARIZONA_MAX_OUTPUT];
+ /** Provide improved ultrasonic frequency response */ + bool ultrasonic_response; + /** PDM speaker mute setting */ unsigned int spk_mute[ARIZONA_MAX_PDM_SPK];
diff --git a/sound/soc/codecs/arizona.c b/sound/soc/codecs/arizona.c index e4295fe..f2e1ffe 100644 --- a/sound/soc/codecs/arizona.c +++ b/sound/soc/codecs/arizona.c @@ -1134,6 +1134,21 @@ static int arizona_hw_params_rate(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream, } sr_val = i;
+ switch (priv->arizona->type) { + case WM5102: + if (priv->arizona->pdata.ultrasonic_response) { + snd_soc_write(codec, 0x80, 0x3); + if (params_rate(params) >= 176400) + snd_soc_write(codec, 0x4dd, 0x1); + else + snd_soc_write(codec, 0x4dd, 0x0); + snd_soc_write(codec, 0x80, 0x0); + } + break; + default: + break; + } + switch (dai_priv->clk) { case ARIZONA_CLK_SYSCLK: snd_soc_update_bits(codec, ARIZONA_SAMPLE_RATE_1,
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 03:47:14PM +0000, Charles Keepax wrote:
Evaluation of the device has given some settings to improve the ultrasonic frequency response. This patch allows the user the option of applying those.
Why would the user ever not want to do this?
- switch (priv->arizona->type) {
- case WM5102:
if (priv->arizona->pdata.ultrasonic_response) {snd_soc_write(codec, 0x80, 0x3);if (params_rate(params) >= 176400)snd_soc_write(codec, 0x4dd, 0x1);elsesnd_soc_write(codec, 0x4dd, 0x0);snd_soc_write(codec, 0x80, 0x0);}break;
The code is only changing the configuration when the user is actually using ultrasonic sample rates so it doesn't seem like it should have a detrimental effect on other configurations.
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 04:06:44PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 03:47:14PM +0000, Charles Keepax wrote:
Evaluation of the device has given some settings to improve the ultrasonic frequency response. This patch allows the user the option of applying those.
Why would the user ever not want to do this?
- switch (priv->arizona->type) {
- case WM5102:
if (priv->arizona->pdata.ultrasonic_response) {snd_soc_write(codec, 0x80, 0x3);if (params_rate(params) >= 176400)snd_soc_write(codec, 0x4dd, 0x1);elsesnd_soc_write(codec, 0x4dd, 0x0);snd_soc_write(codec, 0x80, 0x0);}break;The code is only changing the configuration when the user is actually using ultrasonic sample rates so it doesn't seem like it should have a detrimental effect on other configurations.
Apologies I should have included a bit more in the commit message I think, I will fire out a quick respin.
Thanks, Charles
Evaluation of the device has given some settings to improve the ultrasonic frequency response. This patch allows the user the option of applying those.
Signed-off-by: Charles Keepax ckeepax@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com
include/linux/mfd/arizona/pdata.h | 3 +++
For the MFD change: Acked-by: Lee Jones lee.jones@linaro.org
On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 08:37:30AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
For the MFD change: Acked-by: Lee Jones lee.jones@linaro.org
There's no actual dependency between the two patches AFAICT so I expect the register patch can go straight into the MFD tree?
For the MFD change: Acked-by: Lee Jones lee.jones@linaro.org
There's no actual dependency between the two patches AFAICT so I expect the register patch can go straight into the MFD tree?
That's fine by me. Are you okay with the patch? Can I apply your Ack?
On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 04:48:46PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
For the MFD change: Acked-by: Lee Jones lee.jones@linaro.org
There's no actual dependency between the two patches AFAICT so I expect the register patch can go straight into the MFD tree?
That's fine by me. Are you okay with the patch? Can I apply your Ack?
It looked fine to me - just undocumented numbers! Feel free to add an ack from me if you like.
participants (3)
-
Charles Keepax -
Lee Jones -
Mark Brown