On Thu, 2020-09-03 at 11:01 +0200, Cezary Rojewski wrote:

Hello,

Till v5.4 dpcm_fe_dai_do_trigger was supporting all pcm cmds as each case: SND_SOC_DPCM_TRIGGER_PRE/ _POST/ _BESPOKE was simply passing cmd's value to appropriate variant of _trigger().

Since the addition of: acbf27746ecfa96b290b54cc7f05273482ea128a ASoC: pcm: update FE/BE trigger order based on the command

additional filters have been introduced for _PRE and _POST cases:

switch (cmd) { case SNDRV_PCM_TRIGGER_START: case SNDRV_PCM_TRIGGER_RESUME: case SNDRV_PCM_TRIGGER_PAUSE_RELEASE: ret = dpcm_dai_trigger_fe_be(substream, cmd, true); break; case SNDRV_PCM_TRIGGER_STOP: case SNDRV_PCM_TRIGGER_SUSPEND: case SNDRV_PCM_TRIGGER_PAUSE_PUSH: ret = dpcm_dai_trigger_fe_be(substream, cmd, false); break; default: ret = -EINVAL; break; }

effectively removing support for _DRAIN command - all requests will yield -EINVAL. _BESPOKE was left alone so support remained there.

Now, is DPCM no longer supporting _DRAIN and that's how things should be -or- DPCM still intends to support _DRAIN and mentioned change is unintended regression?

Hi Czarek,

Thanks for bringing this up. It does look like an unintended side- effect of the aforementioned patch. I dont have a way to test the support for the DRAIN command. Would you mind sending the fix for this?

Thanks, Ranjani