Re: [PATCH v2 01/16] ASoC: soc-pcm.c: cleanup soc_get_playback_capture()

[Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Pierre-Louis

Thank you for clarifying the point

> > And unneeded has_xxx will be removed if xxx_only was set (B)
> 
> The problem is that we have two sources of information
> 
> 1) the dais included in the dailink (the (A) part above)
> 2) the dailink itself (the (B) part above)
> 
> the code in A) constructs the information from the ground-up, but it's
> overridden by B).
> 
> You can view it as 'removing unneeded has_xxx' flags, but it's also a
> problem is the dailink information is incorrect...
> 
> In the past we would report an error if the dailink was not aligned with
> the dais. Now we just ignore the dai information.

Ah, OK now I could understand.

Hmm... is below what you mean in summary?

dpcm_xxx is used to declare that the DAI/dailink is possible to use
playback/capture. For example dpcm_playback means the DAI / dailink
should playback-able, if not it is error.

xxx_only is used to limit the playback/capture.
For example the DAI / dailink can use both playback and capture,
but want to use playback only for some reasons, we can use playback_only.

So these are used for different purpose.

Hmm... I re-consider about it for many cases, and indeed these can't
merge. But in such case, this feature is needed not only for DPCM ?

Now Jerome / Amadeusz are suggesting new idea to use bitfield idea.
We can use it ?

	#define PLAYBACK_VALID	BIT(0)
	#define CAPTURE_VALID	BIT(1)

	#define PLAYBACK_LIMIT	BIT(2)
	#define CAPTURE_LIMIT	BIT(3)

I need to think about keeping compatibility, but maybe OK.

Thank you for your help !!

Best regards
---
Renesas Electronics
Ph.D. Kuninori Morimoto