[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6662bf1b61bbc_2f51737023@njaxe.notmuch>
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2024 10:04:43 +0200
From: Matteo Martelli <matteomartelli3@...il.com>
To: Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
Matteo Martelli <matteomartelli3@...il.com>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>,
Samuel Holland <samuel@...lland.org>,
Marcus Cooper <codekipper@...il.com>,
Clément Péron <peron.clem@...il.com>,
linux-sound@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] ASoC: sunxi: sun4i-i2s: fix LRCLK polarity in i2s
mode
Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > - /*
> > - * DAI clock polarity
> > - *
> > - * The setup for LRCK contradicts the datasheet, but under a
> > - * scope it's clear that the LRCK polarity is reversed
> > - * compared to the expected polarity on the bus.
> > - */
>
> I think we should keep that comment somewhere.
I think that keeping that comment would be very misleading since the LRCLK
setup would not contradict the datasheet anymore [1][2].
Also, do you recall any details about the mentioned scope test setup? Was i2s
mode tested in that occasion? It would help clarify the situation.
Could anyone verify this patch against H3/H6 SoCs?
[1]: https://linux-sunxi.org/images/4/4b/Allwinner_H3_Datasheet_V1.2.pdf
section 8.6.7.2
[2]: https://linux-sunxi.org/images/4/46/Allwinner_H6_V200_User_Manual_V1.1.pdf
section 7.2.5.2
Thanks,
Matteo Martelli
Powered by blists - more mailing lists