[alsa-devel] [PATCH] ASOC:DAPM: extend dapm kcontrol to support runtime route update
From: nhcao nhcao@marvell.com
DPCM can dynamically alter the FE to BE PCM links at runtime based on mixer setting updates. DAPM has provided common get/put function for mixer/mux. But these function doesn't call soc_dpcm_runtime_update() func to update pcm links. This patch defines a DPCM DPCM kcontrol. For this control, the common get/put function will update FE to BE links dynamically. This patch has no impact to the current code.
Change-Id: I45e291f467e4fa17e21aa8923c2b712d52067aca Signed-off-by: nhcao nhcao@marvell.com --- include/sound/control.h | 4 ++++ include/sound/soc-dapm.h | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ sound/core/control.c | 1 + sound/soc/soc-dapm.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---- 4 files changed, 61 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/sound/control.h b/include/sound/control.h index 5358892..3788284 100644 --- a/include/sound/control.h +++ b/include/sound/control.h @@ -44,6 +44,8 @@ struct snd_kcontrol_new { unsigned int index; /* index of item */ unsigned int access; /* access rights */ unsigned int count; /* count of same elements */ + /* this kcontrol impact fe<->be relationship at runtime */ + unsigned char dpcm_checked; snd_kcontrol_info_t *info; snd_kcontrol_get_t *get; snd_kcontrol_put_t *put; @@ -63,6 +65,8 @@ struct snd_kcontrol { struct list_head list; /* list of controls */ struct snd_ctl_elem_id id; unsigned int count; /* count of same elements */ + /* this kcontrol impact fe<->be relationship at runtime */ + unsigned char dpcm_checked; snd_kcontrol_info_t *info; snd_kcontrol_get_t *get; snd_kcontrol_put_t *put; diff --git a/include/sound/soc-dapm.h b/include/sound/soc-dapm.h index 56ebdfc..8962884 100644 --- a/include/sound/soc-dapm.h +++ b/include/sound/soc-dapm.h @@ -336,6 +336,38 @@ struct device; .put = snd_soc_dapm_put_pin_switch, \ .private_value = (unsigned long)xname }
+/* dapm & dpcm kcontrol types */ +#define SOC_DAPM_DPCM_SINGLE(xname, reg, shift, max, invert) \ +{ .iface = SNDRV_CTL_ELEM_IFACE_MIXER, .name = xname, \ + .dpcm_checked = 1, .info = snd_soc_info_volsw, \ + .get = snd_soc_dapm_get_volsw, .put = snd_soc_dapm_put_volsw, \ + .private_value = SOC_SINGLE_VALUE(reg, shift, max, invert) } +#define SOC_DAPM_DPCM_SINGLE_TLV(xname, reg, shift, max, invert, tlv_array) \ +{ .iface = SNDRV_CTL_ELEM_IFACE_MIXER, .name = xname, \ + .dpcm_checked = 1, .info = snd_soc_info_volsw, \ + .access = SNDRV_CTL_ELEM_ACCESS_TLV_READ | SNDRV_CTL_ELEM_ACCESS_READWRITE,\ + .tlv.p = (tlv_array), \ + .get = snd_soc_dapm_get_volsw, .put = snd_soc_dapm_put_volsw, \ + .private_value = SOC_SINGLE_VALUE(reg, shift, max, invert) } +#define SOC_DAPM_DPCM_ENUM(xname, xenum) \ +{ .iface = SNDRV_CTL_ELEM_IFACE_MIXER, .name = xname, \ + .dpcm_checked = 1, .info = snd_soc_info_enum_double, \ + .get = snd_soc_dapm_get_enum_double, \ + .put = snd_soc_dapm_put_enum_double, \ + .private_value = (unsigned long)&xenum } +#define SOC_DAPM_DPCM_ENUM_VIRT(xname, xenum) \ +{ .iface = SNDRV_CTL_ELEM_IFACE_MIXER, .name = xname, \ + .dpcm_checked = 1, .info = snd_soc_info_enum_double, \ + .get = snd_soc_dapm_get_enum_virt, \ + .put = snd_soc_dapm_put_enum_virt, \ + .private_value = (unsigned long)&xenum } +#define SOC_DAPM_DPCM_VALUE_ENUM(xname, xenum) \ +{ .iface = SNDRV_CTL_ELEM_IFACE_MIXER, .name = xname, \ + .dpcm_checked = 1, .info = snd_soc_info_enum_double, \ + .get = snd_soc_dapm_get_value_enum_double, \ + .put = snd_soc_dapm_put_value_enum_double, \ + .private_value = (unsigned long)&xenum } + /* dapm stream operations */ #define SND_SOC_DAPM_STREAM_NOP 0x0 #define SND_SOC_DAPM_STREAM_START 0x1 diff --git a/sound/core/control.c b/sound/core/control.c index d8aa206..34df2c4 100644 --- a/sound/core/control.c +++ b/sound/core/control.c @@ -254,6 +254,7 @@ struct snd_kcontrol *snd_ctl_new1(const struct snd_kcontrol_new *ncontrol, SNDRV_CTL_ELEM_ACCESS_TLV_READWRITE| SNDRV_CTL_ELEM_ACCESS_TLV_COMMAND| SNDRV_CTL_ELEM_ACCESS_TLV_CALLBACK)); + kctl.dpcm_checked = ncontrol->dpcm_checked; kctl.info = ncontrol->info; kctl.get = ncontrol->get; kctl.put = ncontrol->put; diff --git a/sound/soc/soc-dapm.c b/sound/soc/soc-dapm.c index dcade13..b568183 100644 --- a/sound/soc/soc-dapm.c +++ b/sound/soc/soc-dapm.c @@ -2868,6 +2868,7 @@ int snd_soc_dapm_put_volsw(struct snd_kcontrol *kcontrol, unsigned int val; int connect, change; struct snd_soc_dapm_update update; + int ret = 0;
if (snd_soc_volsw_is_stereo(mc)) dev_warn(codec->dapm.dev, @@ -2901,12 +2902,16 @@ int snd_soc_dapm_put_volsw(struct snd_kcontrol *kcontrol, card->update = &update; }
- soc_dapm_mixer_update_power(card, kcontrol, connect); + ret = soc_dapm_mixer_update_power(card, kcontrol, connect);
card->update = NULL; }
mutex_unlock(&card->dapm_mutex); + + if ((ret > 0) && (kcontrol->dpcm_checked == 1)) + soc_dpcm_runtime_update(card); + return change; } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(snd_soc_dapm_put_volsw); @@ -2955,6 +2960,7 @@ int snd_soc_dapm_put_enum_double(struct snd_kcontrol *kcontrol, unsigned int val, mux, change; unsigned int mask; struct snd_soc_dapm_update update; + int ret = 0;
if (ucontrol->value.enumerated.item[0] > e->max - 1) return -EINVAL; @@ -2978,12 +2984,16 @@ int snd_soc_dapm_put_enum_double(struct snd_kcontrol *kcontrol, update.val = val; card->update = &update;
- soc_dapm_mux_update_power(card, kcontrol, mux, e); + ret = soc_dapm_mux_update_power(card, kcontrol, mux, e);
card->update = NULL; }
mutex_unlock(&card->dapm_mutex); + + if ((ret > 0) && (kcontrol->dpcm_checked == 1)) + soc_dpcm_runtime_update(card); + return change; } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(snd_soc_dapm_put_enum_double); @@ -3019,6 +3029,7 @@ int snd_soc_dapm_put_enum_virt(struct snd_kcontrol *kcontrol, struct soc_enum *e = (struct soc_enum *)kcontrol->private_value; int change; + int ret = 0;
if (ucontrol->value.enumerated.item[0] >= e->max) return -EINVAL; @@ -3028,9 +3039,13 @@ int snd_soc_dapm_put_enum_virt(struct snd_kcontrol *kcontrol, value = ucontrol->value.enumerated.item[0]; change = dapm_kcontrol_set_value(kcontrol, value); if (change) - soc_dapm_mux_update_power(card, kcontrol, value, e); + ret = soc_dapm_mux_update_power(card, kcontrol, value, e);
mutex_unlock(&card->dapm_mutex); + + if ((ret > 0) && (kcontrol->dpcm_checked == 1)) + soc_dpcm_runtime_update(card); + return change; } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(snd_soc_dapm_put_enum_virt); @@ -3097,6 +3112,7 @@ int snd_soc_dapm_put_value_enum_double(struct snd_kcontrol *kcontrol, unsigned int val, mux, change; unsigned int mask; struct snd_soc_dapm_update update; + int ret = 0;
if (ucontrol->value.enumerated.item[0] > e->max - 1) return -EINVAL; @@ -3120,12 +3136,16 @@ int snd_soc_dapm_put_value_enum_double(struct snd_kcontrol *kcontrol, update.val = val; card->update = &update;
- soc_dapm_mux_update_power(card, kcontrol, mux, e); + ret = soc_dapm_mux_update_power(card, kcontrol, mux, e);
card->update = NULL; }
mutex_unlock(&card->dapm_mutex); + + if ((ret > 0) && (kcontrol->dpcm_checked == 1)) + soc_dpcm_runtime_update(card); + return change; } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(snd_soc_dapm_put_value_enum_double);
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 04:06:59PM +0800, Nenghua Cao wrote:
From: nhcao nhcao@marvell.com
DPCM can dynamically alter the FE to BE PCM links at runtime basedon mixer setting updates. DAPM has provided common get/put function for mixer/mux. But these function doesn't call soc_dpcm_runtime_update() func to update pcm links. This patch defines a DPCM DPCM kcontrol. For this control, the common get/put function will update FE to BE links dynamically. This patch has no impact to the current code.
Why shouldn't we just add the DPCM update to the standard controls - what's the benefit in defining a new set of controls?
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 10:43:47AM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 04:06:59PM +0800, Nenghua Cao wrote:
From: nhcao nhcao@marvell.com
DPCM can dynamically alter the FE to BE PCM links at runtime basedon mixer setting updates. DAPM has provided common get/put function for mixer/mux. But these function doesn't call soc_dpcm_runtime_update() func to update pcm links. This patch defines a DPCM DPCM kcontrol. For this control, the common get/put function will update FE to BE links dynamically. This patch has no impact to the current code.
Why shouldn't we just add the DPCM update to the standard controls - what's the benefit in defining a new set of controls?
Precisely my thoughts too, I think that would be a better approach!
-- ~Vinod
At Thu, 12 Dec 2013 16:06:59 +0800, Nenghua Cao wrote:
From: nhcao nhcao@marvell.com
DPCM can dynamically alter the FE to BE PCM links at runtime basedon mixer setting updates. DAPM has provided common get/put function for mixer/mux. But these function doesn't call soc_dpcm_runtime_update() func to update pcm links. This patch defines a DPCM DPCM kcontrol. For this control, the common get/put function will update FE to BE links dynamically. This patch has no impact to the current code.
Change-Id: I45e291f467e4fa17e21aa8923c2b712d52067aca
Don't include such an internal tag in the public patch.
Signed-off-by: nhcao nhcao@marvell.com
You have to provide your real name in from and signed-off-by tags.
include/sound/control.h | 4 ++++ include/sound/soc-dapm.h | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ sound/core/control.c | 1 + sound/soc/soc-dapm.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---- 4 files changed, 61 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/sound/control.h b/include/sound/control.h index 5358892..3788284 100644 --- a/include/sound/control.h +++ b/include/sound/control.h @@ -44,6 +44,8 @@ struct snd_kcontrol_new { unsigned int index; /* index of item */ unsigned int access; /* access rights */ unsigned int count; /* count of same elements */
- /* this kcontrol impact fe<->be relationship at runtime */
- unsigned char dpcm_checked; snd_kcontrol_info_t *info; snd_kcontrol_get_t *get; snd_kcontrol_put_t *put;
@@ -63,6 +65,8 @@ struct snd_kcontrol { struct list_head list; /* list of controls */ struct snd_ctl_elem_id id; unsigned int count; /* count of same elements */
- /* this kcontrol impact fe<->be relationship at runtime */
- unsigned char dpcm_checked; snd_kcontrol_info_t *info; snd_kcontrol_get_t *get; snd_kcontrol_put_t *put;
You don't need to extend the ALSA core API for such a purpose. It's ASoC-specific, so rather extend struct soc_mixer_control instead, if such a new flag is really needed.
Takashi
On 12/13/2013 12:52 AM, Takashi Iwai wrote:
At Thu, 12 Dec 2013 16:06:59 +0800, Nenghua Cao wrote:
From: nhcao nhcao@marvell.com
DPCM can dynamically alter the FE to BE PCM links at runtime basedon mixer setting updates. DAPM has provided common get/put function for mixer/mux. But these function doesn't call soc_dpcm_runtime_update() func to update pcm links. This patch defines a DPCM DPCM kcontrol. For this control, the common get/put function will update FE to BE links dynamically. This patch has no impact to the current code.
Change-Id: I45e291f467e4fa17e21aa8923c2b712d52067aca
Don't include such an internal tag in the public patch.
Signed-off-by: nhcao nhcao@marvell.com
You have to provide your real name in from and signed-off-by tags.
Thanks for your reminder. Fixed them.
include/sound/control.h | 4 ++++ include/sound/soc-dapm.h | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ sound/core/control.c | 1 + sound/soc/soc-dapm.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---- 4 files changed, 61 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/sound/control.h b/include/sound/control.h index 5358892..3788284 100644 --- a/include/sound/control.h +++ b/include/sound/control.h @@ -44,6 +44,8 @@ struct snd_kcontrol_new { unsigned int index; /* index of item */ unsigned int access; /* access rights */ unsigned int count; /* count of same elements */
- /* this kcontrol impact fe<->be relationship at runtime */
- unsigned char dpcm_checked; snd_kcontrol_info_t *info; snd_kcontrol_get_t *get; snd_kcontrol_put_t *put;
@@ -63,6 +65,8 @@ struct snd_kcontrol { struct list_head list; /* list of controls */ struct snd_ctl_elem_id id; unsigned int count; /* count of same elements */
- /* this kcontrol impact fe<->be relationship at runtime */
- unsigned char dpcm_checked; snd_kcontrol_info_t *info; snd_kcontrol_get_t *get; snd_kcontrol_put_t *put;
You don't need to extend the ALSA core API for such a purpose. It's ASoC-specific, so rather extend struct soc_mixer_control instead, if such a new flag is really needed.
It is a good suggestion. We should avoid touching ALSA core. I also want to introduce little change. I made another patch per your suggestion. Please review it again. Thanks!
Takashi
participants (4)
-
Mark Brown -
Nenghua Cao -
Takashi Iwai -
Vinod Koul