On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 10:13:28AM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>
> >>>+static int snd_soc_init_single_cpu_dai(struct snd_soc_card *card,
> >>>+ struct snd_soc_dai_link *dai_link)
> >>>+{
> >>>+ if (dai_link->cpu_name || dai_link->cpu_of_node ||
> >>>+ dai_link->cpu_dai_name) {
> >>>+ dai_link->num_cpu_dai = 1;
> >>>+ dai_link->cpu_dai = devm_kzalloc(card->dev,
> >>>+ sizeof(struct snd_soc_dai_link_component),
> >>>+ GFP_KERNEL);
> >>>+
> >>>+ if (!dai_link->cpu_dai)
> >>>+ return -ENOMEM;
> >>>+
> >>>+ dai_link->cpu_dai[0].name = dai_link->cpu_name;
> >>>+ dai_link->cpu_dai[0].of_node = dai_link->cpu_of_node;
> >>>+ dai_link->cpu_dai[0].dai_name = dai_link->cpu_dai_name;
> >>Question: is cpu_dai[i].of_node defined for i>0 in the multi cpu_dai case?
> >>
> >
> >Yes, it should be defined.
>
> I have limited understanding of how cpu_of_node would be handled and if
> there is any guidance for DT folks on how to deal with multiple cpu_dais.
>
>From what I could gather, it looks like we need not add additional code.
But, my understanding of DT is pretty limited as well. Vinod, Liam, can you help us
here?
> >
> >>>@@ -1644,7 +1751,7 @@ int snd_soc_runtime_set_dai_fmt(struct snd_soc_pcm_runtime *rtd,
> >>> unsigned int dai_fmt)
> >>> {
> >>> struct snd_soc_dai **codec_dais = rtd->codec_dais;
> >>>- struct snd_soc_dai *cpu_dai = rtd->cpu_dai;
> >>>+ struct snd_soc_dai **cpu_dais = rtd->cpu_dais;
> >>> unsigned int i;
> >>> int ret;
> >>>@@ -1659,35 +1766,44 @@ int snd_soc_runtime_set_dai_fmt(struct snd_soc_pcm_runtime *rtd,
> >>> }
> >>> }
> >>>- /* Flip the polarity for the "CPU" end of a CODEC<->CODEC link */
> >>why was this comment removed?
> >>
> >
> >Looks like I messed up resolving ocnflicts while rebase
> >
> >>> /* the component which has non_legacy_dai_naming is Codec */
> >>>- if (cpu_dai->component->driver->non_legacy_dai_naming) {
> >>Not sure if the code refactoring below makes sense in a codec-codec link,
> >>you probably wouldn't have multiple cpu_dais then, would you?
> >
> >Yes, a valid point. You suggest to leave this piece of code as is ?
>
> Not necessarily. I don't understand how the codec-codec and multi cpu_dais
> intersect, all I am asking for is a check if this change is needed or not.
>
In soc_link_dai_widgets() which is called from probe_dai_links(),
we call out that we do not support multi cpu/codec for CODEC - CODEC link.
All the operation there are done only on single CPU DAI/Codec DAI.
But, in this function snd_soc_dai_set_fmt() is set on all Codec DAIs. So,
for sake of consistency we can do it for CPU DAIs too.
--Shreyas
--
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
