linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] ASoC: fsl_asrc: Add support for imx8qm

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20191030083813.GA9924@Asurada>
Date:   Wed, 30 Oct 2019 01:38:13 -0700
From:   Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>
To:     "S.j. Wang" <shengjiu.wang@....com>
Cc:     "timur@...nel.org" <timur@...nel.org>,
        "Xiubo.Lee@...il.com" <Xiubo.Lee@...il.com>,
        "festevam@...il.com" <festevam@...il.com>,
        "broonie@...nel.org" <broonie@...nel.org>,
        "alsa-devel@...a-project.org" <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
        "lgirdwood@...il.com" <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        "perex@...ex.cz" <perex@...ex.cz>,
        "tiwai@...e.com" <tiwai@...e.com>,
        "robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ASoC: fsl_asrc: Add support for imx8qm

On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 03:20:35AM +0000, S.j. Wang wrote:
> Hi
> 
> > 
> > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 05:17:09PM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote:
> > > There are two asrc module in imx8qm, each module has different clock
> > > configuration, and the DMA type is EDMA.
> > >
> > > So in this patch, we define the new clocks, refine the clock map, and
> > > include struct fsl_asrc_soc_data for different soc usage.
> > >
> > > The EDMA channel is fixed with each dma request, one dma request
> > > corresponding to one dma channel. So we need to request dma channel
> > > with dma request of asrc module.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@....com>
> > > ---
> > >  sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c     | 91 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> > >  sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.h     | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > >  sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc_dma.c | 39 ++++++++++++----
> > >  3 files changed, 167 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
> > 
> > > diff --git a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc_dma.c
> > > b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc_dma.c index d6146de9acd2..dbb07a486504
> > 100644
> > > --- a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc_dma.c
> > > +++ b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc_dma.c
> > > @@ -199,19 +199,40 @@ static int fsl_asrc_dma_hw_params(struct
> > > snd_soc_component *component,
> > >
> > >       /* Get DMA request of Back-End */
> > >       tmp_chan = dma_request_slave_channel(dev_be, tx ? "tx" : "rx");
> > > -     tmp_data = tmp_chan->private;
> > > -     pair->dma_data.dma_request = tmp_data->dma_request;
> > > -     dma_release_channel(tmp_chan);
> > > +     /* tmp_chan may be NULL for it is already allocated by Back-End */
> > > +     if (tmp_chan) {
> > > +             tmp_data = tmp_chan->private;
> > > +             if (tmp_data)
> > > +                     pair->dma_data.dma_request =
> > > + tmp_data->dma_request;
> > 
> > If this patch is supposed to add a !tmp_chan case for EDMA, we probably
> > shouldn't mute the !tmp_data case because dma_request will be NULL,
> > although the code previously didn't have a check either. I mean we might
> > need to error-out for !tmp_chan. Or...
> > is this intentional?
> > 
> 
> Yes, intentional. May be we can change to 
> 
>         if (!asrc_priv->soc->use_edma) {
>                 /* Get DMA request of Back-End */
>                 tmp_chan = dma_request_slave_channel(dev_be, tx ? "tx" : "rx");
>                 tmp_data = tmp_chan->private;
>                 pair->dma_data.dma_request = tmp_data->dma_request;
>                 dma_release_channel(tmp_chan);
> 
>                 /* Get DMA request of Front-End */
>                 tmp_chan = fsl_asrc_get_dma_channel(pair, dir);
>                 tmp_data = tmp_chan->private;
>                 pair->dma_data.dma_request2 = tmp_data->dma_request;
>                 pair->dma_data.peripheral_type = tmp_data->peripheral_type;
>                 pair->dma_data.priority = tmp_data->priority;
>                 dma_release_channel(tmp_chan);
>         }

Oh...now I understand..yea, I think this would be better.

Would you please change it in v2?

I am fine with other places, so may add:

Acked-by: Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>

Thanks