Hello Shengjiu, One issue for error-out and some nit-pickings inline. Thanks. On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 08:11:42PM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote: > There is error "aplay: pcm_write:2023: write error: Input/output error" > on i.MX8QM/i.MX8QXP platform for S24_3LE format. > > In i.MX8QM/i.MX8QXP, the DMA is EDMA, which don't support 24bit > sample, but we didn't add any constraint, that cause issues. > > So we need to query the caps of dma, then update the hw parameters > according to the caps. > > Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@xxxxxxx> > --- > sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c | 4 +-- > sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.h | 3 +++ > sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc_dma.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- > 3 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > @@ -276,6 +274,11 @@ static int fsl_asrc_dma_startup(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream) > struct device *dev = component->dev; > struct fsl_asrc *asrc_priv = dev_get_drvdata(dev); > struct fsl_asrc_pair *pair; > + bool tx = substream->stream == SNDRV_PCM_STREAM_PLAYBACK; > + u8 dir = tx ? OUT : IN; > + struct dma_chan *tmp_chan; > + struct snd_dmaengine_dai_dma_data *dma_data; Nit: would it be possible to reorganize these a bit? Usually we put struct things together unless there is a dependency, similar to fsl_asrc_dma_hw_params(). > @@ -285,9 +288,44 @@ static int fsl_asrc_dma_startup(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream) > > runtime->private_data = pair; > > + /* Request a temp pair, which is release in the end */ Nit: "which will be released later" or "and will release it later"? And could we use a work like "dummy"? Or at least I would love to see the comments explaining the parameter "1" in the function call below. > + ret = fsl_asrc_request_pair(1, pair); > + if (ret < 0) { > + dev_err(dev, "failed to request asrc pair\n"); > + return ret; > + } > + > + tmp_chan = fsl_asrc_get_dma_channel(pair, dir); > + if (!tmp_chan) { > + dev_err(dev, "can't get dma channel\n"); Could we align with other error messages using "failed to"? > + ret = snd_soc_set_runtime_hwparams(substream, &snd_imx_hardware); > + if (ret) > + return ret; > + [...] > + dma_release_channel(tmp_chan); > + fsl_asrc_release_pair(pair); I think we need an "out:" here for those error-out routines to goto. Otherwise, it'd be a pair leak? > + Could we drop this? There is a blank line below already :) > > return 0; > } > -- > 2.21.0 > _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel