On 3/20/20 8:51 AM, Vinod Koul wrote:
On 11-03-20, 17:10, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
From: Rander Wang <rander.wang@xxxxxxxxx>
Somehow the existing code is not aligned with the steps described in
the documentation, refactor code and make sure the register
Is the documentation available public space so that we can correct
No, so you'll have to trust us blindly on this one.
@@ -283,11 +284,48 @@ static int intel_link_power_up(struct sdw_intel *sdw)
{
unsigned int link_id = sdw->instance;
void __iomem *shim = sdw->link_res->shim;
+ u32 *shim_mask = sdw->link_res->shim_mask;
this is a local pointer, so the one defined previously is not used.
No idea what you are saying, it's the same address so changes to
*shim_mask will be the same as in *sdw->link_res->shim_mask.
+ struct sdw_bus *bus = &sdw->cdns.bus;
+ struct sdw_master_prop *prop = &bus->prop;
int spa_mask, cpa_mask;
- int link_control, ret;
+ int link_control;
+ int ret = 0;
+ u32 syncprd;
+ u32 sync_reg;
mutex_lock(sdw->link_res->shim_lock);
+ /*
+ * The hardware relies on an internal counter,
+ * typically 4kHz, to generate the SoundWire SSP -
+ * which defines a 'safe' synchronization point
+ * between commands and audio transport and allows for
+ * multi link synchronization. The SYNCPRD value is
+ * only dependent on the oscillator clock provided to
+ * the IP, so adjust based on _DSD properties reported
+ * in DSDT tables. The values reported are based on
+ * either 24MHz (CNL/CML) or 38.4 MHz (ICL/TGL+).
Sorry this looks quite bad to read, we have 80 chars, so please use
like below:
/*
* The hardware relies on an internal counter, typically 4kHz,
* to generate the SoundWire SSP - which defines a 'safe'
* synchronization point between commands and audio transport
* and allows for multi link synchronization. The SYNCPRD value
* is only dependent on the oscillator clock provided to
* the IP, so adjust based on _DSD properties reported in DSDT
* tables. The values reported are based on either 24MHz
* (CNL/CML) or 38.4 MHz (ICL/TGL+).
*/
Are we really going to have an emacs vs vi discussion here?
