linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] ASoC: fsl_asrc: Change asrc_width to asrc

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

Message-ID: <CAA+D8AMAV=d8FDL4wmUaAx7h7ZBaTZyKJcwXqkA+oWDLLF6oYw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 28 Feb 2020 14:56:47 +0800
From:   Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@...il.com>
To:     Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>
Cc:     Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@....com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-ALSA <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
        Timur Tabi <timur@...nel.org>, Xiubo Li <Xiubo.Lee@...il.com>,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] ASoC: fsl_asrc: Change asrc_width to asrc_format

On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 2:40 PM Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 10:54:02AM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 1:45 AM Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 01:10:19PM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 11:43 AM Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 10:41:55AM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote:
> > > > > > asrc_format is more inteligent variable, which is align
> > > > > > with the alsa definition snd_pcm_format_t.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@....com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > >  sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c     | 23 +++++++++++------------
> > > > > >  sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.h     |  4 ++--
> > > > > >  sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc_dma.c |  2 +-
> > > > > >  3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c
> > > > > > index 0dcebc24c312..2b6a1643573c 100644
> > > > > > --- a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c
> > > > > > +++ b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c
> > > > >
> > > > > > @@ -600,11 +599,6 @@ static int fsl_asrc_dai_hw_params(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >       pair->config = &config;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -     if (asrc_priv->asrc_width == 16)
> > > > > > -             format = SNDRV_PCM_FORMAT_S16_LE;
> > > > > > -     else
> > > > > > -             format = SNDRV_PCM_FORMAT_S24_LE;
> > > > >
> > > > > It feels better to me that we have format settings in hw_params().
> > > > >
> > > > > Why not let fsl_easrc align with this? Any reason that I'm missing?
> > > >
> > > > because the asrc_width is not formal,  in the future we can direct
> > >
> > > Hmm..that's our DT binding. And I don't feel it is a problem
> > > to be ASoC irrelative.
> > >
> > > > input the format from the dts. format involve the info about width.
> > >
> > > Is there such any formal ASoC binding? I don't see those PCM
> > > formats under include/dt-bindings/ folder. How are we going
> > > to involve those formats in DT?
> >
> > There is no formal binding of this case.
> >
> > I think it is not good to convert width to format, because, for example
>
> The thing is that fsl_easrc does the conversion too... It just
> does in the probe instead of hw_params(), and then copies them
> in the hw_params(). So I don't see obvious benefit by doing so.
>
> > width = 24,  there is two option, we can select format S24_LE,  or
> > format S24_3LE,  width is ambiguous for selecting.
> >
> > In EASRC, it support other two 24bit format U24_LE, U24_3LE .
>
> I understood the reason here, but am not seeing the necessity,
> at this point.
>
> > if we use the format in DT, then it is clear for usage in driver.
>
> I think this is the thing that we should address first. If we
> have such a binding being added with the new fsl_easrc driver,
> I'd love to see the old driver aligning with the new one.
>
> Otherwise, we can keep the old way, and change it when the new
> binding is ready.

ok,  I will change the binding this time in next version.

best regards
wang shengjiu