From: Laxmi Devi <Laxmi.Devi@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
These changes are required due to the kernel commit 07b7acb51d283d8469696c906b91f1882696a4d4
("ASoC: rsnd: update pointer more accurate")
Issue is that snd_pcm_wait() goes back to waiting because the hw_ptr
is not period aligned. Therefore snd_pcm_wait() will block for a longer
time as required.
With these rcar driver changes the exact position of the dma is returned.
During snd_pcm_start they read hw_ptr as reference, and this hw_ptr
is now not period aligned, and is a little ahead over the period while it
is read. Therefore when the avail is calculated during snd_pcm_wait(),
it is missing the avail_min by a few frames.
Consider the below example:
Considering the application is trying to write 0x120 frames and the
period_size = 0x60, avail_min = 0x120 and buffersize = 0x360 :
rsnd_pointer=0x12c -> dma pointer at the end of second write during
snd_pcm_dmix_start().
Since another 0x120 buffer is available, application writes 0x120 and goes
to snd_pcm_wait().
It is woken up after 3 snd_pcm_period_elapsed() to see rsnd_pointer=0x248.
So hw_ptr = new_slave_hw_ptr - reference_slave_hw_ptr = 0x248 - 0x12c = 0x11c.
It needs 4 more frames to be able to write. And so it goes back to waiting.
But since 3 snd_pcm_period_elapsed(), 3 periods should be available and it
should have been able to write.
If rsnd_pointer during the start was 0x120 which is 3 periods
then 0x248 - 0x120 = 128 it could go on with write.
Signed-off-by: Laxmi Devi <Laxmi.Devi@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Timo Wischer <twischer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
We are not completely sure if this is the best approach but we had also no
better idea to solve this problem (with similar CPU usage).
Therefore if anyone has a better solution please feel free to describe
this one.
src/pcm/pcm_dmix.c | 9 ++++-----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/pcm/pcm_dmix.c b/src/pcm/pcm_dmix.c
index a6a8f3a..d3e9319 100644
--- a/src/pcm/pcm_dmix.c
+++ b/src/pcm/pcm_dmix.c
@@ -560,11 +560,10 @@ static int snd_pcm_dmix_hwsync(snd_pcm_t *pcm)
static void reset_slave_ptr(snd_pcm_t *pcm, snd_pcm_direct_t *dmix)
{
dmix->slave_appl_ptr = dmix->slave_hw_ptr = *dmix->spcm->hw.ptr;
- if (pcm->buffer_size > pcm->period_size * 2)
- return;
- /* If we have too litte periods, better to align the start position
- * to the period boundary so that the interrupt can be handled properly
- * at the right time.
+ dmix->slave_hw_ptr = ((dmix->slave_hw_ptr / dmix->slave_period_size)
+ * dmix->slave_period_size);
+ /* Better to align the start position to the period boundary so that
+ * the interrupt can be handled properly at the right time.
*/
dmix->slave_appl_ptr = ((dmix->slave_appl_ptr + dmix->slave_period_size - 1)
/ dmix->slave_period_size) * dmix->slave_period_size;
--
2.7.4
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
