On 7/26/19 5:42 AM, Cezary Rojewski wrote:
On 2019-07-26 01:40, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
Move code to helper for reuse in power management routines
Signed-off-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart
<pierre-louis.bossart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/soundwire/intel.c | 16 +++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/soundwire/intel.c b/drivers/soundwire/intel.c
index c40ab443e723..215dc81cdf73 100644
--- a/drivers/soundwire/intel.c
+++ b/drivers/soundwire/intel.c
@@ -984,6 +984,15 @@ static struct sdw_master_ops sdw_intel_ops = {
.post_bank_switch = intel_post_bank_switch,
};
+static int intel_init(struct sdw_intel *sdw)
+{
+ /* Initialize shim and controller */
+ intel_link_power_up(sdw);
+ intel_shim_init(sdw);
+
+ return sdw_cdns_init(&sdw->cdns);
+}
Why don't we check polling status for _link_power_up? I've already met
slow starting devices in the past. If polling fails and -EAGAIN is
returned, flow of initialization should react appropriately e.g. poll
till MAX_TIMEOUT of some sort -or- collapse.
The code does what it states, it initializes the Intel and Cadence IPs.
What you are referring to is a different problem: once the bus starts,
then Slave devices will report as attached, and will be enumerated. This
will take time. The devices I tested show up immediately and within a
couple of ms the bus is operational. But MIPI allows to the sync to take
up to 4096 frames, which is 85ms with a 48kHz frame rate, so yes we do
need to look into this.
We currently do not have a notification that tells us the bus is back to
normal, that's a design flaw - see the last patch of the series where I
kicked the can down the road but adding an artificial delay.
So yes good point indeed but on the wrong patch :-)
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
