On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 08:18:06PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 10:32:41AM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > > But neither of these is a CODEC so why would the CODEC flag be set in > > the DAI? Unless your "Codec" here is genuinely the CODEC rather than > > the CPU DAI connected to the CODEC in which case surely this is just a > > normal DAI link? > Sorry Mark for late reply.. > You are right this is like a normal link, and yes that is _exactly_ we need, > but we also need parameters to be specified for this as this is hostless. > The moment I add 'params" core will do different connections which do not > work for us. > I am okay if you have something else in mind which solves our problem :) Isn't this what the DPCM fixup() is supposed to handle? As I keep saying I really think these systems would work a lot better if they were representing the DSP as a CODEC, that makes everything much more consistent and less riddled with special cases.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
