rt5663 and rt5514 needs mclk/sclk early to synchronize its internal
clocks.
There are a couple of differences with similar code used in
kbl_rt5663_max98927, see below
diff --git a/sound/soc/intel/boards/Kconfig b/sound/soc/intel/boards/Kconfig
index 5c27f7a..d5f167e 100644
--- a/sound/soc/intel/boards/Kconfig
+++ b/sound/soc/intel/boards/Kconfig
@@ -315,6 +315,7 @@ config SND_SOC_INTEL_KBL_RT5663_RT5514_MAX98927_MACH
depends on I2C && ACPI
depends on MFD_INTEL_LPSS || COMPILE_TEST
depends on SPI
+ select SND_SOC_INTEL_SKYLAKE_SSP_CLK
It would be nicer to follow the same order as for kbl_rt5663_max98927,
with this SKYLAKE_SSP_CLK added last after HDAC_HDMI
+static int platform_clock_control(struct snd_soc_dapm_widget *w,
+ struct snd_kcontrol *k, int event)
+{
+ struct snd_soc_dapm_context *dapm = w->dapm;
+ struct snd_soc_card *card = dapm->card;
+ struct kbl_codec_private *priv = snd_soc_card_get_drvdata(card);
+ int ret = 0;
+
+ /*
+ * MCLK/SCLK need to be ON early for a successful synchronization of
+ * codec internal clock. And the clocks are turned off during
+ * POST_PMD after the stream is stopped.
+ */
+ switch (event) {
+ case SND_SOC_DAPM_PRE_PMU:
+ if (__clk_is_enabled(priv->mclk))
+ return 0;
Is this if() test needed? it's not part of the code for
kbl_rt5663_max98927, despite all the comments and code structure being
identical.
+
+ /* Enable MCLK */
+ ret = clk_set_rate(priv->mclk, 24000000);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(card->dev, "Can't set rate for mclk, err: %d\n",
+ ret);
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ ret = clk_prepare_enable(priv->mclk);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(card->dev, "Can't enable mclk, err: %d\n", ret);
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ /* Enable SCLK */
+ ret = clk_set_rate(priv->sclk, 3072000);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(card->dev, "Can't set rate for sclk, err: %d\n",
+ ret);
+ clk_disable_unprepare(priv->mclk);
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ ret = clk_prepare_enable(priv->sclk);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(card->dev, "Can't enable sclk, err: %d\n", ret);
+ clk_disable_unprepare(priv->mclk);
+ }
+ break;
+ case SND_SOC_DAPM_POST_PMD:
+ if (!__clk_is_enabled(priv->mclk))
+ return 0;
same here, is this if() test needed? If yes, isn't it needed in
kbl_rt5663_max98927?
+
+ clk_disable_unprepare(priv->mclk);
+ clk_disable_unprepare(priv->sclk);
+ break;
+ default:
+ return 0;
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
While I am at it, this machine driver uses .ignore_pmdown_time, which is
typically used to avoid clock issues. Now that you have an explicit
control on clocks, is .ignore_pmdown_time actually required?
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
