@@ -1810,18 +1972,22 @@ static int dpcm_apply_symmetry(struct snd_pcm_substream *fe_substream,
{
struct snd_soc_dpcm *dpcm;
struct snd_soc_pcm_runtime *fe = fe_substream->private_data;
- struct snd_soc_dai *fe_cpu_dai = fe->cpu_dai;
+ struct snd_soc_dai *fe_cpu_dai;
int err;
+ int i;
/* apply symmetry for FE */
if (soc_pcm_has_symmetry(fe_substream))
fe_substream->runtime->hw.info |= SNDRV_PCM_INFO_JOINT_DUPLEX;
/* Symmetry only applies if we've got an active stream. */
- if (fe_cpu_dai->active) {
- err = soc_pcm_apply_symmetry(fe_substream, fe_cpu_dai);
- if (err < 0)
- return err;
+ /* Do we need to support Multi cpu for FE? */
+ for_each_rtd_cpu_dai(fe, i, fe_cpu_dai) {
+ if (fe_cpu_dai->active) {
+ err = soc_pcm_apply_symmetry(fe_substream, fe_cpu_dai);
+ if (err < 0)
+ return err;
+ }
that part seems inconsistent with Patch 4 where you add warnings/error
everywhere there's a FE with num_cpus>1
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
