Hey,
catching up with the thread :)
On Fri, 28 Feb 2020, Kuninori Morimoto wrote:
> > > start(substream-A); <=
> > > start(substream-B);
> > > start(substream-C);
> > >
> > > stop(substream-Z); <=
> > > stop(substream-B);
> > > stop(substream-C);
[snip]
> I don't want to have substream list on each components,
> and keep simple code as much as possible.
[snip]
> My current idea is using ID. What do you think ?
> It is not super simple though...
Hmm, I think then we end up with new problems managing the IDs.
Specifically:
> int soc_pcm_open(...)
> {
> static u8 id;
>
> /* update ID */
> id++;
> if (id == 0)
> id++;
... this really isn't solid. If you have a complex scenario and something
goes wrong, debugging the ids is going to be painful if they are assigned
this way.
I think in the end we should go back to this:
int snd_soc_component_open(struct snd_soc_component *component,
» » » struct snd_pcm_substream *substream)
... this essentially creates new state by assigning a new substream to the
component, and we should explicitly track it. I know you wanted to avoid
this, but I think in the end it's the cleanest solution and aligned to
rest of ALSA. Aside cleaning up implementation of close(), this will help
also in other methods, like e.g.:
int snd_soc_component_prepare(struct snd_soc_component *component,
» » » struct snd_pcm_substream *substream)
{
» if (component->driver->prepare)
» » return component->driver->prepare(component, substream);
» return 0;
}
.. if prepare() is called with a substream that is not opened for this
component, we could catch it here if we were tracking substreams.
Br, Kai
