[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <s5h63sdqjeq.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 20:28:13 +0200
From: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
To: Thomas Meyer <thomas@...3r.de>
Cc: linux-next@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for June 12
At Fri, 13 Jun 2008 21:56:31 +0200,
Thomas Meyer wrote:
>
> Am Donnerstag, den 12.06.2008, 17:53 +1000 schrieb Stephen Rothwell:
>
> > Changes since next-20080611:
> >
>
> Beginning with next-20080612 i've got no sound!
>
> git bisect told me that, the offending commit is cbc5a5b7d12b4d461bff132f76abc0d4f9f3d8fc (ALSA: hda - Add bdl_pos_adj option):
>
> I need to add the option bdl_pos_adj=0, to make sound work again, which gives this dmesg entry:
>
> [ 64.697747] hda-intel: IRQ timing workaround is activated for card #0. Suggest a bigger bdl_pos_adj.
>
> The sound card is:
>
> $ cat /proc/asound/cards
> 0 [NVidia ]: HDA-Intel - HDA NVidia
> HDA NVidia at 0xfbff0000 irq 21
>
>
> $ /sbin/lspci -vv -s 00:06.1
> 00:06.1 Audio device: nVidia Corporation MCP55 High Definition Audio (rev a2)
> Subsystem: Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. Unknown device 7250
> Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx-
> Status: Cap+ 66MHz+ UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- INTx-
> Latency: 0 (500ns min, 1250ns max)
> Interrupt: pin B routed to IRQ 21
> Region 0: Memory at fbff0000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=16K]
> Capabilities: <access denied>
> Kernel driver in use: HDA Intel
> Kernel modules: snd-hda-intel
>
> What makes me wonder is, that the commit says:
> " The new option adds the size of the delay in frames. As default,
> it's set to 1 -- that is, one sample delay. Even the hardware is
> really correct, one sample delay is relatively harmless in comparison
> with reporting wrong positions."
>
> Maybe my definition of "harmless" is not "no sound".
> Would you please check this problem?
It was harmless for Intel and ATI hardwares :)
We've not tested NVidia ones. Good that you caught it fast.
Could you check whether another value, e.g. bdl_pos_adj=32 works?
Since the warning is shown with bdl_pos_adj=0, any position adjustment
is necessary, but likely Nvidia hardware doesn't allow such a fine
sample resolution like bdl_pos_adj=1.
Thanks,
Takashi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists