[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f9631faa-5fc8-ecdd-709b-93b58e45a1ac@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 May 2021 16:40:30 +0300
From: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
To: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
Ion Agorria <ion@...rria.com>,
Svyatoslav Ryhel <clamor95@...il.com>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>
Cc: alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] ASoC: tegra: Unify ASoC machine drivers
24.05.2021 15:22, Jon Hunter пишет:
>
>
> On 21/05/2021 20:05, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>
> ...
>
>>>> +unsigned int tegra_asoc_machine_mclk_rate(unsigned int srate)
>>>> +{
>>>> + unsigned int mclk;
>>>> +
>>>> + switch (srate) {
>>>> + case 64000:
>>>> + case 88200:
>>>> + case 96000:
>>>> + mclk = 128 * srate;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + default:
>>>> + mclk = 256 * srate;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + }
>>>> + /* FIXME: Codec only requires >= 3MHz if OSR==0 */
>>>> + while (mclk < 6000000)
>>>> + mclk *= 2;
>>>
>>> So this appears to be specific to the wm8903 codec or at least this is
>>> where it came from. And given that the switch statement is not complete
>>> in terms of the sample rates (ie. only has a subset), I am wondering if
>>> set should keep this specific to the wm8903 codec?
>>
>> The RT5631 codec of Asus Transformers will re-use this function.
>
> OK, but does it need this FIXME part? That appears to be codec specific.
Downstream RT5631 Tegra driver has exactly the same FIXME.
Although, I now see that downstream RT5631 uses 384*srate for the
default cases.
I also see that WM8994 driver that we have in grate-kernel for Galaxy
Tab and SGH-I927 also re-uses that mclk_rate function.
>> IIUC, the default switch-case works properly for all rates below 64KHz,
>> at least I haven't had any problems with it. Could you please clarify
>> why you are saying that the switch statement appears to be incomplete?
>
> It looks a bit weird because less than 64kHz and greater than 96kHz we
> use 256 and for only 64kHz, 88.2kHz and 96kHz we use 128. So it is not
> clear to me which sample rates have actually been tested with this and
> if this is complete or not?
>
> Is it intended that we use 256 for sample rates greater than 96kHz?
The 128*srate gives MCLK >6MHZ for 64/88/96, 256*srate gives MCLK >6MHZ
for rates below 64kHZ. Looks like the goal is to get MCLK >6MHZ.
The WM8903 datasheet says:
"The following operating frequency limits must be observed when
configuring CLK_SYS. Failure to observe these limits will
result in degraded noise performance and/or incorrect
ADC/DAC functionality.
If DAC_OSR = 0 then CLK_SYS 3MHz
If DAC_OSR = 1 then CLK_SYS 6MHz"
Where DAC_OSR is DAC Oversampling Control
0 = Low power (normal oversample)
1 = High performance (double rate)
I see that DAC_OSR=0 by default, it can be switched to 1 by userspace
ALSA control.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists