[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <s5hr510397z.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 08:30:24 +0100
From: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Cc: "alsa-devel@...a-project.org" <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] hda - delayed ELD repoll
At Mon, 21 Nov 2011 14:48:11 +0800,
Wu Fengguang wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 04:29:47PM +0800, Wu, Fengguang wrote:
> > The Intel HDMI chips (ironlake at least) are found to have ~250ms delay
> > between the ELD_Valid=1 hotplug event is send and the ELD buffer becomes
> > actually readable. During the time the ELD buffer is mysteriously all 0.
> >
> > Fix it by scheduling a delayed work to re-read ELD buffer after 300ms.
>
> Just FYI.
>
> Up to now the 300ms looks sufficient. But if ever there comes longer
> delays, I've already prepared a patch for retrying it for several times ;)
Thanks. I think it's safer to have a repoll mechanism.
But, looking at the patch, one question remains:
> @@ -989,10 +990,9 @@ static void hdmi_present_sense(struct hd
> if (eld_valid) {
> if (!snd_hdmi_get_eld(eld, codec, pin_nid))
> snd_hdmi_show_eld(eld);
> - else if (retry) {
> + else if (repoll) {
> queue_delayed_work(codec->bus->workq,
> - &per_pin->work,
> - msecs_to_jiffies(300));
> + &per_pin->work, repoll * HZ / 3);
Do you really want to wait longer with a higher repoll number?
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