[PATCH 02/17] ASoC: use snd_soc_dai/component_activity()

[Ranjani Sridharan]

On Tue, 2020-05-12 at 08:53 +0900, Kuninori Morimoto wrote:
> Hi Ranjani
> 
> Thank you for reviewing
> 
> > > -	if (!cpu_dai->active)
> > > +	if (!snd_soc_dai_activity(cpu_dai))
> > 
> > I have a feeling this is probably incorrect. snd_soc_dai_activity()
> > checks for stream_active count which is different from
> > snd_soc_dai's
> > active member, isnt it?
> 
> OK, let me check.
> The original code is like this
> 
> 	static void snd_soc_runtime_action(struct snd_soc_pcm_runtime
> *rtd,
> 					   int stream, int action)
> 	{
> 		...
> 		for_each_rtd_dais(rtd, i, dai) {
> 			dai->stream_active[stream] += action;
> 			dai->active += action;
> 			...
> 		}
> 	}
> 
> 	void snd_soc_runtime_activate(...)
> 	{
> 		snd_soc_runtime_action(rtd, stream, 1);
> 	}
> 
> 	void snd_soc_runtime_deactivate(...)
> 	{
> 		snd_soc_runtime_action(rtd, stream, -1);
> 	}
> 
> 
> Basically, ASoC calls
> snd_soc_runtime_activate()   for activate count up, and,
> snd_soc_runtime_deactivate() for activate count down.
> 
> I think snd_soc_dai_activity() is correct, *so far*.
> 
> Exceptions are
> soc-dapm.c :: snd_soc_dai_link_event_pre_pmu()
> soc-dapm.c :: snd_soc_dai_link_event()
> 
> 	snd_soc_dai_link_event_pre_pmu(...)
> 	{
> 		...
> 		snd_soc_dapm_widget_for_each_source_path(w, path) {
> 			...
> 			source->active++;
> 		}
> 		...
> 		snd_soc_dapm_widget_for_each_sink_path(w, path) {
> 			...
> 			sink->active++;
> 		}
> 		...
> 	}
> 
> 	snd_soc_dai_link_event(...)
> 	{
> 		...
> 		snd_soc_dapm_widget_for_each_source_path(w, path) {
> 			...
> 			source->active--;
> 			...
> 		}
> 
> 		snd_soc_dapm_widget_for_each_sink_path(w, path) {
> 			...
> 			sink->active--;
> 			...
> 		}
> 		...
> 	}
> 	
> Only these directly access to dai->active, *without* thinking
> stream_active.
> I think it should use snd_soc_runtime_activate() /
> snd_soc_runtime_deactivate().
> My patch cares it... Oops !!
> I thought my patch cares it, but not enough (= [02/17]).
> 
> Can you agree below ?
> 	1) use runtime_activate()/deactivate() at above functions.
I am wondering what the original intention for having separate
stream_active and active members for snd_soc_dai was. With your
proposal there wouldnt be a need for "active" anymore, isnt it?

Thanks,
Ranjani