On 22/05/23 23:50, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>> @@ -464,16 +488,79 @@ static int acp63_sdw_platform_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> status = devm_snd_soc_register_component(&pdev->dev,
>> &acp63_sdw_component,
>> NULL, 0);
>> - if (status)
>> + if (status) {
>> dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Fail to register sdw dma component\n");
>> + return status;
>> + }
>> + pm_runtime_set_autosuspend_delay(&pdev->dev, ACP_SUSPEND_DELAY_MS);
>> + pm_runtime_use_autosuspend(&pdev->dev);
>> + pm_runtime_enable(&pdev->dev);
>> + pm_runtime_allow(&pdev->dev);
> Can you remind me why you need the pm_runtime_allow()? I can't recall
> where the _forbid() is done.
We have used pm_runtime_allow() to allow the device immediately
enter runtime suspend state. Yes you are correct. If we use pm_runtime_allow(),
then in remove sequence we should use pm_runtime_forbid call.
> Also is there not a pm_runtime_set_active() missing?
We will change the sequence as mentioned below.
in probe sequence , we will use
pm_runtime_set_autosuspend_delay(&pdev->dev, ACP_SUSPEND_DELAY_MS);
pm_runtime_use_autosuspend(&pdev->dev);
pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(&pdev->dev);
pm_runtime_set_active(&pdev->dev);
pm_runtime_enable(&pdev->dev);
In remove sequence
pm_runtime_disable(&pdev->dev);
>
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>>
>> - return status;
>> +static int acp63_sdw_platform_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> +{
>> + pm_runtime_disable(&pdev->dev);
>> + return 0;
>> }
>>
>> +static int __maybe_unused acp63_sdw_pcm_resume(struct device *dev)
>> +{
>> + struct sdw_dma_dev_data *sdw_data;
>> + struct acp_sdw_dma_stream *stream;
>> + struct snd_pcm_runtime *runtime;
>> + u32 period_bytes, buf_size, water_mark_size_reg;
>> + int ret;
>> + int index;
>> +
>> + sdw_data = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>> + for (index = 0; index < ACP63_SDW0_DMA_MAX_STREAMS; index++) {
>> + if (sdw_data->sdw0_dma_stream[index] &&
>> + sdw_data->sdw0_dma_stream[index]->runtime) {
>> + water_mark_size_reg = sdw0_dma_ring_buf_reg[index].water_mark_size_reg;
>> + runtime = sdw_data->sdw0_dma_stream[index]->runtime;
>> + stream = runtime->private_data;
>> + period_bytes = frames_to_bytes(runtime, runtime->period_size);
>> + buf_size = frames_to_bytes(runtime, runtime->buffer_size);
>> + acp63_config_dma(stream, sdw_data->acp_base, index);
>> + ret = acp63_configure_sdw_ringbuffer(sdw_data->acp_base, index,
>> + buf_size, ACP_SDW0);
>> + if (ret)
>> + return ret;
>> + writel(period_bytes, sdw_data->acp_base + water_mark_size_reg);
>> + }
>> + }
>> + for (index = 0; index < ACP63_SDW1_DMA_MAX_STREAMS; index++) {
>> + if (sdw_data->sdw1_dma_stream[index] &&
>> + sdw_data->sdw1_dma_stream[index]->runtime) {
>> + water_mark_size_reg = sdw1_dma_ring_buf_reg[index].water_mark_size_reg;
>> + runtime = sdw_data->sdw1_dma_stream[index]->runtime;
>> + stream = runtime->private_data;
>> + period_bytes = frames_to_bytes(runtime, runtime->period_size);
>> + buf_size = frames_to_bytes(runtime, runtime->buffer_size);
>> + acp63_config_dma(stream, sdw_data->acp_base, index);
>> + ret = acp63_configure_sdw_ringbuffer(sdw_data->acp_base, index,
>> + buf_size, ACP_SDW1);
>> + if (ret)
>> + return ret;
>> + writel(period_bytes, sdw_data->acp_base + water_mark_size_reg);
>> + }
>> + }
> Isn't this set of configurations something that needs to be done already
> somewhere else, i.e. could there be a common helper?
In hw_params() callback, we are setting period_bytes and buf_size from
params structure. We are extracting same variables from runtime structures
in resume() callback.
We can implement a helper function to further simplify above logic
instead of having two separate loops.
>
>> + acp63_enable_disable_sdw_dma_interrupts(sdw_data->acp_base, true);
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static const struct dev_pm_ops acp63_pm_ops = {
>> + SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS(NULL, acp63_sdw_pcm_resume)
>> +};
>> +
>> static struct platform_driver acp63_sdw_dma_driver = {
>> .probe = acp63_sdw_platform_probe,
>> + .remove = acp63_sdw_platform_remove,
>> .driver = {
>> .name = "amd_ps_sdw_dma",
>> + .pm = &acp63_pm_ops,
>> },
>> };
>>
