linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] ASoC: simple-card-utils: Fix device module clock

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: <99d5d684-54a2-9010-890c-632cdde83030@nvidia.com>
Date:   Mon, 15 Mar 2021 21:27:54 +0530
From:   Sameer Pujar <spujar@...dia.com>
To:     Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
CC:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        <kuninori.morimoto.gx@...esas.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>, <robh@...nel.org>,
        <sharadg@...dia.com>, <thierry.reding@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ASoC: simple-card-utils: Fix device module clock



On 3/15/2021 9:03 PM, Michael Walle wrote:
> Am 2021-03-15 16:19, schrieb Sameer Pujar:
>> On 3/15/2021 5:35 PM, Michael Walle wrote:
>>> Am 2021-03-12 14:46, schrieb Mark Brown:
>>>> On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 01:30:02PM +0100, Michael Walle wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The card calls set_sysclk(), which eventually ends up in the codec.
>>>>> The codec therefore, could figure out if it needs to configure the
>>>>> clock or if it can use its internal FLL.
>>>>> Is that what you mean?
>>>>
>>>> Yes.
>>>>
>>>>> But the set_sysclk() of the codec isn't even called, because the
>>>>> card itself already tries to call clk_set_rate() on the Codec's
>>>>> MCLK,
>>>>> which returns with an error [0].
>>>>
>>>> OK, so I think we need to push this down a level so that the clock
>>>> setting is implemented by the core/CODEC rather than by simple-card,
>>>> with the helpers being something the CODEC can opt out of.
>>>
>>> Sameer, it looks like the proper fix should be to add the clock
>>> support to your codec.
>>
>> I agree that complicated clock relationships should be handled within
>> the codec itself, however MCLK rate setting depends on "mclk-fs"
>> factor and this property is specified as part of
>> simple-card/audio-graph-card codec subnode. Right now codec, in
>> general, does not have a way to know this. The set_sysclk() callback
>> takes rate argument and not the factor.
>
> Why would you need the factor?

Sorry, you are right. I misread the flow. Fixed rates can use 
"assigned-clocks" binding and runtime updates can depend on "mclk-fs". 
No additional property is required for codec. Something like below 
should help.

>
> diff --git a/sound/soc/codecs/rt5659.c b/sound/soc/codecs/rt5659.c
> index 67f0ab817135..7fd41f51f856 100644
> --- a/sound/soc/codecs/rt5659.c
> +++ b/sound/soc/codecs/rt5659.c
> @@ -3426,12 +3426,18 @@ static int rt5659_set_component_sysclk(struct
> snd_soc_component *component, int
>  {
>         struct rt5659_priv *rt5659 =
> snd_soc_component_get_drvdata(component);
>         unsigned int reg_val = 0;
> +       int ret;
>
>         if (freq == rt5659->sysclk && clk_id == rt5659->sysclk_src)
>                 return 0;
>
>         switch (clk_id) {
>         case RT5659_SCLK_S_MCLK:
> +               ret = clk_set_rate(rt5659->mclk, freq);
> +               if (ret)
> +                       return ret;
>                 reg_val |= RT5659_SCLK_SRC_MCLK;
>                 break;
>         case RT5659_SCLK_S_PLL1: