[alsa-devel] [PATCH] ASoC: soc-pcm: Use delay set in pointer function
Pierre-Louis Bossart
pierre-louis.bossart at linux.intel.com
Mon Jul 30 17:15:44 CEST 2018
On 7/27/18 11:28 PM, Agrawal, Akshu wrote:
>
>
> On 7/27/2018 8:39 PM, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>> On 7/27/18 5:13 AM, Akshu Agrawal wrote:
>>> There are cases where a pointer function populates
>>> runtime->delay, such as:
>>> ./sound/pci/hda/hda_controller.c
>>> ./sound/soc/intel/atom/sst-mfld-platform-pcm.c
>>>
>>> Also, in some cases cpu dai used is generic and the pcm
>>> driver needs to set delay.
>>>
>>> This delay was getting lost and was overwritten by delays
>>> from codec or cpu dai delay function if exposed.
>>
>> Humm, yes the runtime->delay set in the .pointer function would be lost
>> without this change, but the delay would still be provided in the
>> followup call to .delay.
>> With your change, the same delay will be accounted for twice?
>>
>
> It will not be accounted twice because no driver which is setting
> runtime->delay is defining .delay op for cpu_dai. Vice versa is also
> true, the drivers which define .delay for cpu_dai don't set
> runtime->delay. And I think this is expected from drivers else it would
> be a bug from their side.
what do you mean my 'no driver'? Can you clarify if this is based on
analysis of the code or by-design. I don't recall having seen any
guidelines on this topic, and it's quite likely that different people
have different interpretation on how delay is supposed to be reported.
>
> .delay for codec_dai anyway is different and has to be accounted for.
>
> Thanks,
> Akshu
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Akshu Agrawal <akshu.agrawal at amd.com>
>>> ---
>>> sound/soc/soc-pcm.c | 5 ++++-
>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/sound/soc/soc-pcm.c b/sound/soc/soc-pcm.c
>>> index 98be04b..b1a2bc2 100644
>>> --- a/sound/soc/soc-pcm.c
>>> +++ b/sound/soc/soc-pcm.c
>>> @@ -1179,6 +1179,9 @@ static snd_pcm_uframes_t soc_pcm_pointer(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream)
>>> snd_pcm_sframes_t codec_delay = 0;
>>> int i;
>>>
>>> + /* clearing the previous delay */
>>> + runtime->delay = 0;
>>> +
>>> for_each_rtdcom(rtd, rtdcom) {
>>> component = rtdcom->component;
>>>
>>> @@ -1203,7 +1206,7 @@ static snd_pcm_uframes_t soc_pcm_pointer(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream)
>>> }
>>> delay += codec_delay;
>>>
>>> - runtime->delay = delay;
>>> + runtime->delay += delay;
>>>
>>> return offset;
>>> }
>>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Alsa-devel mailing list
> Alsa-devel at alsa-project.org
> http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
>
More information about the Alsa-devel
mailing list