[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87sgqe203g.wl-kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com>
Date: 06 Aug 2019 17:05:52 +0900
From: Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@...esas.com>
To: Jiada Wang <jiada_wang@...tor.com>
Cc: <lgirdwood@...il.com>, <broonie@...nel.org>, <perex@...ex.cz>,
<tiwai@...e.com>, <twischer@...adit-jv.com>,
<alsa-devel@...a-project.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] ASoC: rsnd: Allow reconfiguration of clock rate
Hi Jiada
> > 2nd, can we keep usrcnt setup as-is ?
> > I guess we can just avoid rsnd_ssi_master_clk_start() if ssi->rate was not 0 ?
>
> I don't fully understand your 2nd question,
> in case of rsnd_ssi_master_clk_stop(), if avoid
> rsnd_ssi_master_clk_stop() when ssi->rate is 0 by apply following
> change
>
> static void rsnd_ssi_master_clk_stop(struct rsnd_mod *mod,
> struct rsnd_dai_stream *io)
> {
> ...
> - if (ssi->usrcnt > 1)
> + if (ssi->rate == 0)
> return;
> ...
> }
>
> then when any IO stream with same SSI calls .hw_free,
> the other IO stream's clock will be stopped too.
I think we can find more simple solution if we can find good ideas.
For example, how about to add new counter for hw_params/hw_free ?
Anyway, [3/3] patch is too much over-kill to me.
And, please don't exchange usrcnt inc/dec position at [2/3].
It is for open/close.
Thank you for your help !!
Best regards
---
Kuninori Morimoto
Powered by blists - more mailing lists