linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl_sai: Clean code for synchronize mode

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+D8ANagfMXPAkK4-vBDY9rZMukVUXs8FfBCHS0avXt57pekA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 4 Aug 2020 10:35:12 +0800
From:   Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@...il.com>
To:     Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>
Cc:     Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@....com>,
        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>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl_sai: Clean code for synchronize mode

On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 10:11 AM Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 09:39:44AM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 5:57 AM Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 03, 2020 at 04:04:23PM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > clock generation. The TCSR.TE is no need to enabled when only RX
> > > > > > is enabled.
> > > > >
> > > > > You are correct if there's only RX running without TX joining.
> > > > > However, that's something we can't guarantee. Then we'd enable
> > > > > TE after RE is enabled, which is against what RM recommends:
> > > > >
> > > > > # From 54.3.3.1 Synchronous mode in IMX6SXRM
> > > > > # If the receiver bit clock and frame sync are to be used by
> > > > > # both the transmitter and receiver, it is recommended that
> > > > > # the receiver is the last enabled and the first disabled.
> > > > >
> > > > > I remember I did this "ugly" design by strictly following what
> > > > > RM says. If hardware team has updated the RM or removed this
> > > > > limitation, please quote in the commit logs.
> > > >
> > > > There is no change in RM and same recommandation.
> > > >
> > > > My change does not violate the RM. The direction which generates
> > > > the clock is still last enabled.
> > >
> > > Using Tx syncing with Rx clock for example,
> > > T1: arecord (non-stop) => set RE
> > > T2: aplay => set TE then RE (but RE is already set at T1)
> > >
> > > Anything that I am missing?
> >
> > This is a good example.
> > We have used this change locally for a long time, so I think it is
> > safe to do this change, a little different with the recommandation.
>
> Any reason for we have to go against the recommendation?

Previous code will enable TE and RE  together even for asynchronous
mode.
And for recommendation, previous code just consider the RX sync with
TX, but still violates the recommendation for TX sync with RX case.
So at least this new change is some kind of improvement.

best regards
wang shengjiu