linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] ASoc: kirkwood: merge kirkwood-i2c and kirkwood-dma

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 26 Jul 2013 11:58:31 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Jean-Francois Moine <moinejf@...e.fr>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] ASoc: kirkwood: merge kirkwood-i2c and kirkwood-dma

On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 11:58:16PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 08:16:04PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:

> > This seems mostly fine, though it may be best to keep kirkwood-dma as a
> > separate module for the benefit of the S/PDIF support when it gets added
> > - I had a look at the implementation Russell has and it looks like it
> > can be added as a separate interface.

> You wouldn't want I2S and SPDIF to be separate modules though - they're
> the same hardware but different output stream formatters attached to the
> DMA FIFO output.  Don't forget the requirements concerning the simultaneous
> use of I2S and SPDIF - these "output formatters" must both be enabled and
> disabled in unison when concurrent use is required - both bits must be
> set or cleared together with a single register write.

OK, I knew they both needed to know about each other and to share some
stuff but I figured it was reasonable to compile out the S/PDIF support
if only using I2S or similar - so long as they're coupled at runtime it
should be fine.

> > Should the name be done as dev_name() for the interface (I don't know if
> > there is ever more than one)?

> Getting away from "kirkwood-i2s" would be sensible, because it may not be
> just "i2s" in this hardware block.  The documentation calls this an "audio
> controller" but I guess "kirkwood-pcm" would be a reasonable compromise,
> even though it has a separate AC'97 block which could also be construed
> as being "pcm".

I was thinking just pick a name at runtime based on what was doing the
instantiation which would avoid hard coding anything in the DMA driver.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)