Nori, Sekhar wrote: > On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 00:31:00, troy.kisky@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >> On Tue 13/07/10 6:00 AM , "Nori, Sekhar" nsekhar@xxxxxx sent: >> > >> The reason is so that the IRAM data can be fetched and used >> while >> >> EVENTQ_1 fetches the next buffer of data from sdram into IRAM. > > Thanks for the explanation. That sounds reasonable. > > Just curious as to whether you actually faced an issue > when using the same event queue for both transfers? > > I just tested this on DM365 with both transfers on EDMAQ_0 > with 16K each of capture and playback IRAM at 48KHz > sampling rate and did not find any issue. > > Anyway it makes sense to make provision for platform to choose > different queues for both transfers so will implement my patch > that way. > > Thanks, > Sekhar > IIRC, the DM365 has a fifo, the 6443/6446 doesn't. So, the 365 doesn't need to use IRAM and shouldn't use it. Test using the same controller on a board without a fifo. Troy _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
