[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <s5heffjr8ys.wl-tiwai@suse.de>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2018 12:32:59 +0200
From: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: "Agrawal, Akshu" <Akshu.Agrawal@....com>,
Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>,
"moderated list:SOUND - SOC LAYER / DYNAMIC AUDIO POWER MANAGEM..."
<alsa-devel@...a-project.org>, Alexander.Deucher@....com,
djkurtz@...omium.org, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH] ASoC: soc-pcm: Use delay set in pointer function
On Tue, 31 Jul 2018 12:19:43 +0200,
Mark Brown wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 11:25:11AM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
>
> > It's not necessary that all CPU dais provide the pointer callback.
> > My suggestion is that, if CPU dai *wants* to provide the base delay,
> > it must be tied with the position value, hence it should provide the
> > pointer callback. If CPU dai has a pointer callback,
> > snd_soc_pcm_pointer() skips the component pointer callback but uses
> > CPU dai pointer callback instead.
>
> However since it's not supposed to be providing any DMA a CPU DAI really
> shouldn't be doing this...
Well, if so, the CPU dai also cannot get the exact base delay
corresponding to the reported position, either, no?
Takashi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists