[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200715140519.GH5431@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 15:05:19 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>
Cc: Arnaud Ferraris <arnaud.ferraris@...labora.com>,
alsa-devel@...a-project.org, Timur Tabi <timur@...nel.org>,
Xiubo Li <Xiubo.Lee@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, kernel@...labora.com,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] ASoC: fsl_asrc: allow selecting arbitrary clocks
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 01:50:50PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 09:27:53PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > The nominal rate might be the same but if they're in different clock
> > domains then the actual rates might be different (hence the desire for
> > an ASRC I guess). I can see the system wanting to choose one clock or
> > the other on the basis of some system specific property (quality of the
> > clock sources, tolerances of the devices involved or something) though
> > it's a rather fun edge case configuration :/ .
> Thanks for the input. Fox i.MX6, I don't feel it would be that
> drastically different though. And both SSI1 and SSI2 can simply
> select the same root clock source to avoid that happen.
If you've got two radios that both need to sync to some radio derived
frequency it gets a bit more entertaining.
> Yet, in case that we need to support such an edge case, what's
> a relatively common practice to allow system select the clock
> source now?
Honestly for anything that fun it tends to be a custom machine driver.
A property would seem reasonable though.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists