Hi Richard
Thank you for your patch.
One comment from me.
> struct asoc_simple_dai {
> const char *name;
> unsigned int sysclk;
> @@ -26,6 +31,9 @@ struct asoc_simple_dai {
> unsigned int rx_slot_mask;
> struct clk *clk;
> bool clk_fixed;
> + struct asoc_simple_tdm_width_map *tdm_width_map;
> + int n_tdm_widths;
> + struct snd_soc_dai *dai;
> };
(snip)
> + ret = snd_soc_dai_set_tdm_slot(simple_dai->dai,
> + simple_dai->tx_slot_mask,
> + simple_dai->rx_slot_mask,
> + simple_dai->slots,
> + slot_width);
(snip)
> + for_each_prop_dai_codec(props, i, pdai) {
> + ret = asoc_simple_set_tdm(pdai, params);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + for_each_prop_dai_cpu(props, i, pdai) {
> + ret = asoc_simple_set_tdm(pdai, params);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> + }
(snip)
> @@ -386,6 +479,8 @@ static int asoc_simple_init_dai(struct snd_soc_dai *dai,
> if (!simple_dai)
> return 0;
>
> + simple_dai->dai = dai;
Indeed the relationship between asoc_simple_dai and snd_soc_dai are
very mystery, and current utils is using confusable naming.
We want to have some better solution about there.
Having snd_soc_dai pointer inside asoc_simple_dai itself is not bad idea.
But we can get snd_soc_dai pointer without it.
Please check asoc_simple_dai_init().
Not tested, but we can replace the code like this ?
=> struct snd_soc_dai *dai;
for_each_prop_dai_codec(props, i, pdai) {
=> dai = asoc_rtd_to_codec(rtd, i);
ret = asoc_simple_set_tdm(dai, pdai, params);
if (ret < 0)
return ret;
}
Thank you for your help !!
Best regards
---
Kuninori Morimoto
