This reverts commit 957ce0c6b8a1f26559864507ae0bfcba29d924ad.
That commit cause soc_pcm_params_symmetry can't take effect.
cpu_dai->rate, cpu_dai->channels and cpu_dai->sample_bits
are updated in the middle of soc_pcm_hw_params, so move
soc_pcm_params_symmetry to the end of soc_pcm_hw_params is
not a good solution, for judgement of symmetry in the function
is always true.
FIXME:
According to the comments of that commit, I think the case
described in the commit should disable symmetric_rates
in Back-End, rather than changing the position of
soc_pcm_params_symmetry.
Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@xxxxxxx>
---
sound/soc/soc-pcm.c | 8 +++++---
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/sound/soc/soc-pcm.c b/sound/soc/soc-pcm.c
index 8655df6a6089..b7800c95327a 100644
--- a/sound/soc/soc-pcm.c
+++ b/sound/soc/soc-pcm.c
@@ -861,6 +861,11 @@ static int soc_pcm_hw_params(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream,
int i, ret = 0;
mutex_lock_nested(&rtd->card->pcm_mutex, rtd->card->pcm_subclass);
+
+ ret = soc_pcm_params_symmetry(substream, params);
+ if (ret)
+ goto out;
+
if (rtd->dai_link->ops->hw_params) {
ret = rtd->dai_link->ops->hw_params(substream, params);
if (ret < 0) {
@@ -940,9 +945,6 @@ static int soc_pcm_hw_params(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream,
}
component = NULL;
- ret = soc_pcm_params_symmetry(substream, params);
- if (ret)
- goto component_err;
out:
mutex_unlock(&rtd->card->pcm_mutex);
return ret;
--
2.21.0
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
