| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <abf07f9a-d34e-850f-1ed1-54b373960ce2@amd.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2023 17:01:35 +0530
From: "Mukunda,Vijendar" <vijendar.mukunda@....com>
To: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>,
broonie@...nel.org, vkoul@...nel.org, alsa-devel@...a-project.org
Cc: Basavaraj.Hiregoudar@....com, Sunil-kumar.Dommati@....com,
Mario.Limonciello@....com, Mastan.Katragadda@....com,
arungopal.kondaveeti@....com,
Bard Liao <yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com>,
Sanyog Kale <sanyog.r.kale@...el.com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/19] soundwire: amd: register sdw controller dai ops
On 11/01/23 20:28, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>
> On 1/11/23 03:02, Vijendar Mukunda wrote:
>> Register dai ops for two controller instances.
> manager instances
will change it.
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/soundwire/amd_master.c b/drivers/soundwire/amd_master.c
>> index 7e1f618254ac..93bffe6ff9e2 100644
>> --- a/drivers/soundwire/amd_master.c
>> +++ b/drivers/soundwire/amd_master.c
>> @@ -952,6 +952,186 @@ static const struct sdw_master_ops amd_sdwc_ops = {
>> .read_ping_status = amd_sdwc_read_ping_status,
>> };
>>
>> +static int amd_sdwc_hw_params(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream,
>> + struct snd_pcm_hw_params *params,
>> + struct snd_soc_dai *dai)
>> +{
>> + struct amd_sdwc_ctrl *ctrl = snd_soc_dai_get_drvdata(dai);
>> + struct sdw_amd_dma_data *dma;
>> + struct sdw_stream_config sconfig;
>> + struct sdw_port_config *pconfig;
>> + int ch, dir;
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + dma = snd_soc_dai_get_dma_data(dai, substream);
>> + if (!dma)
>> + return -EIO;
>> +
>> + ch = params_channels(params);
>> + if (substream->stream == SNDRV_PCM_STREAM_CAPTURE)
>> + dir = SDW_DATA_DIR_RX;
>> + else
>> + dir = SDW_DATA_DIR_TX;
>> + dev_dbg(ctrl->dev, "%s: dir:%d dai->id:0x%x\n", __func__, dir, dai->id);
>> + dma->hw_params = params;
>> +
>> + sconfig.direction = dir;
>> + sconfig.ch_count = ch;
>> + sconfig.frame_rate = params_rate(params);
>> + sconfig.type = dma->stream_type;
>> +
>> + sconfig.bps = snd_pcm_format_width(params_format(params));
>> +
>> + /* Port configuration */
>> + pconfig = kzalloc(sizeof(*pconfig), GFP_KERNEL);
>> + if (!pconfig) {
>> + ret = -ENOMEM;
>> + goto error;
>> + }
>> +
>> + pconfig->num = dai->id;
>> + pconfig->ch_mask = (1 << ch) - 1;
>> + ret = sdw_stream_add_master(&ctrl->bus, &sconfig,
>> + pconfig, 1, dma->stream);
>> + if (ret)
>> + dev_err(ctrl->dev, "add master to stream failed:%d\n", ret);
>> +
>> + kfree(pconfig);
>> +error:
>> + return ret;
>> +}
> This looks inspired from intel.c, but you are not programming ANY
> registers here. is this intentional?
We don't have any additional registers to be programmed like intel.
>
>> +static int amd_sdwc_hw_free(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream, struct snd_soc_dai *dai)
>> +{
>> + struct amd_sdwc_ctrl *ctrl = snd_soc_dai_get_drvdata(dai);
>> + struct sdw_amd_dma_data *dma;
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + dma = snd_soc_dai_get_dma_data(dai, substream);
>> + if (!dma)
>> + return -EIO;
>> +
>> + ret = sdw_stream_remove_master(&ctrl->bus, dma->stream);
>> + if (ret < 0) {
>> + dev_err(dai->dev, "remove master from stream %s failed: %d\n",
>> + dma->stream->name, ret);
>> + return ret;
>> + }
>> + dma->hw_params = NULL;
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int amd_set_sdw_stream(struct snd_soc_dai *dai, void *stream, int direction)
>> +{
>> + struct amd_sdwc_ctrl *ctrl = snd_soc_dai_get_drvdata(dai);
>> + struct sdw_amd_dma_data *dma;
> you want to avoid using dma_data and use your own runtime. We made that
> change recently for cadence_runtime.c
>
will check the implementation.
>> +
>> + if (stream) {
>> + if (direction == SNDRV_PCM_STREAM_PLAYBACK)
>> + dma = dai->playback_dma_data;
>> + else
>> + dma = dai->capture_dma_data;
>> +
>> + if (dma) {
>> + dev_err(dai->dev,
>> + "dma_data already allocated for dai %s\n",
>> + dai->name);
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + }
>> +
>> + /* allocate and set dma info */
>> + dma = kzalloc(sizeof(*dma), GFP_KERNEL);
>> + if (!dma)
>> + return -ENOMEM;
>> + dma->stream_type = SDW_STREAM_PCM;
>> + dma->bus = &ctrl->bus;
>> + dma->link_id = ctrl->instance;
>> + dma->stream = stream;
>> +
>> + if (direction == SNDRV_PCM_STREAM_PLAYBACK)
>> + dai->playback_dma_data = dma;
>> + else
>> + dai->capture_dma_data = dma;
>> + } else {
>> + if (direction == SNDRV_PCM_STREAM_PLAYBACK) {
>> + kfree(dai->playback_dma_data);
>> + dai->playback_dma_data = NULL;
>> + } else {
>> + kfree(dai->capture_dma_data);
>> + dai->capture_dma_data = NULL;
>> + }
>> + }
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int amd_pcm_set_sdw_stream(struct snd_soc_dai *dai, void *stream, int direction)
>> +{
>> + return amd_set_sdw_stream(dai, stream, direction);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void *amd_get_sdw_stream(struct snd_soc_dai *dai, int direction)
>> +{
>> + struct sdw_amd_dma_data *dma;
>> +
>> + if (direction == SNDRV_PCM_STREAM_PLAYBACK)
>> + dma = dai->playback_dma_data;
>> + else
>> + dma = dai->capture_dma_data;
>> +
>> + if (!dma)
>> + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>> +
>> + return dma->stream;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static const struct snd_soc_dai_ops amd_sdwc_dai_ops = {
>> + .hw_params = amd_sdwc_hw_params,
>> + .hw_free = amd_sdwc_hw_free,
>> + .set_stream = amd_pcm_set_sdw_stream,
> In the first patch there was support for PDM exposed, but here it's PDM
> only?
Didn't get your question.
First patch talks about creating dev nodes for Soundwire managers and
ACP PDM controller based on ACP pin config.
Let us know if we are missing anything?
>
>> + .get_stream = amd_get_sdw_stream,
>> +};
>> +
>> +static const struct snd_soc_component_driver amd_sdwc_dai_component = {
>> + .name = "soundwire",
>> +};
>> +
>> +static int amd_sdwc_register_dais(struct amd_sdwc_ctrl *ctrl)
>> +{
>> + struct snd_soc_dai_driver *dais;
>> + struct snd_soc_pcm_stream *stream;
>> + struct device *dev;
>> + int i, num_dais;
>> +
>> + dev = ctrl->dev;
>> + num_dais = ctrl->num_dout_ports + ctrl->num_din_ports;
>> + dais = devm_kcalloc(dev, num_dais, sizeof(*dais), GFP_KERNEL);
>> + if (!dais)
>> + return -ENOMEM;
>> + for (i = 0; i < num_dais; i++) {
>> + dais[i].name = devm_kasprintf(dev, GFP_KERNEL, "SDW%d Pin%d", ctrl->instance, i);
>> + if (!dais[i].name) {
>> + dev_err(ctrl->dev, "-ENOMEM dai name allocation failed\n");
> remove, we don't add error logs on memory allocation issues.
>
>> + return -ENOMEM;
>> + }
>> +
>> + if (i < ctrl->num_dout_ports)
>> + stream = &dais[i].playback;
>> + else
>> + stream = &dais[i].capture;
>> +
>> + stream->channels_min = 2;
>> + stream->channels_max = 2;
> Is this a port limitation or just a software definition?
>
>> + stream->rates = SNDRV_PCM_RATE_48000;
>> + stream->formats = SNDRV_PCM_FMTBIT_S16_LE;
> Wondering if this is needed. I don't even recall why it's in the Intel
> code, we tested with 32 bit data and 192kHz, that looks unnecessary to
> me unless the hardware is really limited to those values.
>
>> +
>> + dais[i].ops = &amd_sdwc_dai_ops;
>> + dais[i].id = i;
>> + }
>> +
>> + return devm_snd_soc_register_component(ctrl->dev, &amd_sdwc_dai_component,
>> + dais, num_dais);
>> +}
>> +
>> static void amd_sdwc_probe_work(struct work_struct *work)
>> {
>> struct amd_sdwc_ctrl *ctrl = container_of(work, struct amd_sdwc_ctrl, probe_work);
>> @@ -1043,6 +1223,12 @@ static int amd_sdwc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> ret);
>> return ret;
>> }
>> + ret = amd_sdwc_register_dais(ctrl);
>> + if (ret) {
>> + dev_err(dev, "CPU DAI registration failed\n");
>> + sdw_bus_master_delete(&ctrl->bus);
>> + return ret;
>> + }
>> INIT_WORK(&ctrl->probe_work, amd_sdwc_probe_work);
>> schedule_work(&ctrl->probe_work);
>> return 0;
>> diff --git a/include/linux/soundwire/sdw_amd.h b/include/linux/soundwire/sdw_amd.h
>> index 5ec39f8c2f2e..7a99d782969f 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/soundwire/sdw_amd.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/soundwire/sdw_amd.h
>> @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
>> #define ACP_SDW0 0
>> #define ACP_SDW1 1
>> #define ACP_SDW0_MAX_DAI 6
>> +#define AMD_SDW_MAX_DAIS 8
> How does this work? 6 dais for the first master and 2 for the second?
>
>>
>> struct acp_sdw_pdata {
>> u16 instance;
>> @@ -25,6 +26,7 @@ struct amd_sdwc_ctrl {
>> void __iomem *mmio;
>> struct work_struct probe_work;
>> struct mutex *sdw_lock;
>> + struct sdw_stream_runtime *sruntime[AMD_SDW_MAX_DAIS];
> well no, a stream runtime needs to be allocated per stream and usually
> there's a 1:1 mapping between dailink and stream. A stream may use
> multiple DAIs, possibly on different masters - just like a dailink can
> rely on multiple cpu- and codec-dais.
>
> You are conflating/confusing concepts I am afraid here.
>
>> int num_din_ports;
>> int num_dout_ports;
>> int cols_index;
>> @@ -36,4 +38,23 @@ struct amd_sdwc_ctrl {
>> bool startup_done;
>> u32 power_mode_mask;
>> };
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * struct sdw_amd_dma_data: AMD DMA data
>> + *
>> + * @name: SoundWire stream name
>> + * @stream: stream runtime
>> + * @bus: Bus handle
>> + * @stream_type: Stream type
>> + * @link_id: Master link id
>> + * @hw_params: hw_params to be applied in .prepare step
>> + */
>> +struct sdw_amd_dma_data {
>> + char *name;
>> + struct sdw_stream_runtime *stream;
>> + struct sdw_bus *bus;
>> + enum sdw_stream_type stream_type;
>> + int link_id;
>> + struct snd_pcm_hw_params *hw_params;
>> +};
>> #endif
Powered by blists - more mailing lists