On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 05:44:11PM +0800, Jiaxin Yu wrote:
> + /*
> + * PCM trigger callback.
> + * Mandatory
> + */
> + int (*trigger)(struct device *dev, int cmd);
> +
Making this mandatory would break all existing users, though...
> + switch (event) {
> + case SND_SOC_DAPM_PRE_PMU:
> + if (hcp->hcd.ops->trigger)
> + hcp->hcd.ops->trigger(component->dev->parent, SNDRV_PCM_TRIGGER_START);
...it's not actually mandatory so it's just the comment that's wrong.
I'm a little unclear why this is being implemented as a DAPM operation
rather than having the driver forward the PCM trigger op if it's needed?
Or alternatively if a DAPM callback is needed why not provide one
directly rather than hooking into the trigger function - that's going to
be called out of sequence with the rest of DAPM and be potentially
confusing given the very different environments that trigger and DAPM
operations run in. A quick glance at the it6505 driver suggests it'd be
happier with a DAPM callback.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
