> > >>> case SND_SOC_DAPM_POST_PMD: > >>> - clk_disable_unprepare(priv->mclk); > >>> - clk_disable_unprepare(priv->sclk); > >>> + if (__clk_is_enabled(priv->mclk)) > >>> + clk_disable_unprepare(priv->mclk); > >>> + > >> > >> [1] this seems wrong in case you have two SSPs working, and stop one. > >> This would turn off the mclk while one of the two SSPs is still working. > > For this platform we use either headset or dmic. > > There is no way we can record simultaneously using different devices. > > So disabling mclk might not be harmful here. But this case will always be true > too :). > > Maybe CRAS prevents you from recording on two inputs, but it looks like you > have independent front-ends so in theory couldn't you record at the alsa hw: > device level? Is this really mutually exclusive at the hardware level? True. Its not mutually exclusive at hardware level. the following might be safe if (!__clk_is_enabled(priv->sclk0)) && (!__clk_is_enabled(priv->sclk1)) clk_disable_unprepare(priv->mclk); > > Also is the clock only needed for the rt5663 and rt5514, the amplifier does not > need it? That’s right. max98927 does not need mclk. > > >> > >>> + if (__clk_is_enabled(sclk)) > >> > >> [2] Again is this test needed since sclk is not shared between SSPs > > Same thought process to check if its enabled or not. Will remove that. > >> > >>> + clk_disable_unprepare(sclk); > >
