[alsa-devel] [PATCH v6 1/3] ASoC: Add initial support for multiple CPU DAIs
Pierre-Louis Bossart
pierre-louis.bossart at linux.intel.com
Fri Jun 22 17:13:28 CEST 2018
>>> +static int snd_soc_init_single_cpu_dai(struct snd_soc_card *card,
>>> + struct snd_soc_dai_link *dai_link)
>>> +{
>>> + if (dai_link->cpu_name || dai_link->cpu_of_node ||
>>> + dai_link->cpu_dai_name) {
>>> + dai_link->num_cpu_dai = 1;
>>> + dai_link->cpu_dai = devm_kzalloc(card->dev,
>>> + sizeof(struct snd_soc_dai_link_component),
>>> + GFP_KERNEL);
>>> +
>>> + if (!dai_link->cpu_dai)
>>> + return -ENOMEM;
>>> +
>>> + dai_link->cpu_dai[0].name = dai_link->cpu_name;
>>> + dai_link->cpu_dai[0].of_node = dai_link->cpu_of_node;
>>> + dai_link->cpu_dai[0].dai_name = dai_link->cpu_dai_name;
>> Question: is cpu_dai[i].of_node defined for i>0 in the multi cpu_dai case?
>>
>
> Yes, it should be defined.
I have limited understanding of how cpu_of_node would be handled and if
there is any guidance for DT folks on how to deal with multiple cpu_dais.
>
>>> @@ -1644,7 +1751,7 @@ int snd_soc_runtime_set_dai_fmt(struct snd_soc_pcm_runtime *rtd,
>>> unsigned int dai_fmt)
>>> {
>>> struct snd_soc_dai **codec_dais = rtd->codec_dais;
>>> - struct snd_soc_dai *cpu_dai = rtd->cpu_dai;
>>> + struct snd_soc_dai **cpu_dais = rtd->cpu_dais;
>>> unsigned int i;
>>> int ret;
>>> @@ -1659,35 +1766,44 @@ int snd_soc_runtime_set_dai_fmt(struct snd_soc_pcm_runtime *rtd,
>>> }
>>> }
>>> - /* Flip the polarity for the "CPU" end of a CODEC<->CODEC link */
>> why was this comment removed?
>>
>
> Looks like I messed up resolving ocnflicts while rebase
>
>>> /* the component which has non_legacy_dai_naming is Codec */
>>> - if (cpu_dai->component->driver->non_legacy_dai_naming) {
>> Not sure if the code refactoring below makes sense in a codec-codec link,
>> you probably wouldn't have multiple cpu_dais then, would you?
>
> Yes, a valid point. You suggest to leave this piece of code as is ?
Not necessarily. I don't understand how the codec-codec and multi
cpu_dais intersect, all I am asking for is a check if this change is
needed or not.
>
>>> - unsigned int inv_dai_fmt;
>>> + for (i = 0; i < rtd->num_cpu_dai; i++) {
>>> + struct snd_soc_dai *cpu_dai = cpu_dais[i];
>>> + unsigned int inv_dai_fmt, temp_dai_fmt;
>>> - inv_dai_fmt = dai_fmt & ~SND_SOC_DAIFMT_MASTER_MASK;
>>> - switch (dai_fmt & SND_SOC_DAIFMT_MASTER_MASK) {
>>> - case SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBM_CFM:
>>> - inv_dai_fmt |= SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBS_CFS;
>>> - break;
>>> - case SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBM_CFS:
>>> - inv_dai_fmt |= SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBS_CFM;
>>> - break;
>>> - case SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBS_CFM:
>>> - inv_dai_fmt |= SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBM_CFS;
>>> - break;
>>> - case SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBS_CFS:
>>> - inv_dai_fmt |= SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBM_CFM;
>>> - break;
>>> - }
>>> + temp_dai_fmt = dai_fmt;
>>> + if (cpu_dai->component->driver->non_legacy_dai_naming) {
>>> - dai_fmt = inv_dai_fmt;
>>> - }
>>> + inv_dai_fmt = dai_fmt & ~SND_SOC_DAIFMT_MASTER_MASK;
>>> - ret = snd_soc_dai_set_fmt(cpu_dai, dai_fmt);
>>> - if (ret != 0 && ret != -ENOTSUPP) {
>>> - dev_warn(cpu_dai->dev,
>>> - "ASoC: Failed to set DAI format: %d\n", ret);
>>> - return ret;
>>> + switch (dai_fmt & SND_SOC_DAIFMT_MASTER_MASK) {
>>> + case SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBM_CFM:
>>> + inv_dai_fmt |= SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBS_CFS;
>>> + break;
>>> +
>>> + case SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBM_CFS:
>>> + inv_dai_fmt |= SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBS_CFM;
>>> + break;
>>> +
>>> + case SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBS_CFM:
>>> + inv_dai_fmt |= SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBM_CFS;
>>> + break;
>>> +
>>> + case SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBS_CFS:
>>> + inv_dai_fmt |= SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBM_CFM;
>>> + break;
>>> +
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + temp_dai_fmt = inv_dai_fmt;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + ret = snd_soc_dai_set_fmt(cpu_dai, temp_dai_fmt);
>>> + if (ret != 0 && ret != -ENOTSUPP) {
>>> + dev_warn(cpu_dai->dev,
>>> + "ASoC: Failed to set DAI format: %d\n", ret);
>>> + return ret;
>>> + }
>>> }
>>>
>>
>
More information about the Alsa-devel
mailing list