On 07/22/2011 09:56 AM, Manuel Lauss wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 07/22/2011 08:54 AM, Manuel Lauss wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 1:54 AM, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> diff --git a/sound/soc/au1x/dma.c b/sound/soc/au1x/dma.c
>>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>>> index 0000000..0f7d90a
>>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>>> +++ b/sound/soc/au1x/dma.c
>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,470 @@
>>>>> [...]
>>>>> +
>>>>> +static struct platform_driver alchemy_ac97pcm_driver = {
>>>>> + .driver = {
>>>>> + .name = AC97C_DMANAME,
>>>>> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
>>>>> + },
>>>>> + .probe = alchemy_pcm_drvprobe,
>>>>> + .remove = __devexit_p(alchemy_pcm_drvremove),
>>>>> +};
>>>>> +
>>>>> +static struct platform_driver alchemy_i2spcm_driver = {
>>>>> + .driver = {
>>>>> + .name = I2SC_DMANAME,
>>>>> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
>>>>> + },
>>>>> + .probe = alchemy_pcm_drvprobe,
>>>>> + .remove = __devexit_p(alchemy_pcm_drvremove),
>>>>> +};
>>>>
>>>> You shouldn't really have to register two identical drivers for this. If you
>>>> really want to be able to instantiate the driver with two different names use
>>>> platform_device_id. But in my opinion it should be enough to just have one
>>>> generic name, since there is nothing AC97 or I2S specific in this driver.
>>>
>>> I need a unique name for the DMA device in soc_dai_link. This was the
>>> easiest way. Especially since both ac97 and i2s can be active at
>>> runtime.
>>
>> If you want to instantiate two pcm drivers you can just give the devices
>> different ids. As there is nothing I2C or AC97 specific in the pcm driver it
>> should not matter which one is used for what, if two devices are active at the
>> same time.
>> Right now you need to know which one is which, because you instantiate the
>> driver with either the I2C or AC97 DMA addresses, but if you use
>> snd_soc_dai_get_dma_data as described below and pass the DMA address at runtime
>> this issue will go away.
>
> so instead of "alchemy-pcm-{ac97|i2s}" i'd have "alchemy-pcm.[01]". Not really
> much clearer in my book. And I still need to know the correct suffix for
> dai link.
>
Since there is nothing I2S or AC97 specific in the PCM driver it doesn't really
make much sense to put it in the pcm driver name in my opinion.
I would suspect that the common case is, that an board use either AC97 or I2S
audio, but not both. So in this case you'd always just have alchemy-pcm.0 in
your dai link regardless of whether the board uses AC97 or I2S.
>
>>>>> [...]
>>>>> +
>>>>> +struct platform_device *alchemy_pcm_add(struct platform_device *pdev, int type)
>>>>> +{
>>>> + struct resource *res, *r;
>>>> + struct platform_device *pd;
>>>> + char *pdevname;
>>>> + int id[2];
>>>> + int ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + r = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_DMA, 0);
>>>> + if (!r)
>>>> + return NULL;
>>>> + id[0] = r->start;
>>>> +
>>>> + r = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_DMA, 1);
>>>> + if (!r)
>>>> + return NULL;
>>>> + id[1] = r->start;
>>>> +
>>>> + res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource) * 2, GFP_KERNEL);
>>>> + if (!res)
>>>> + return NULL;
>>>> +
>>>> + res[0].start = res[0].end = id[0];
>>>> + res[1].start = res[1].end = id[1];
>>>> + res[0].flags = res[1].flags = IORESOURCE_DMA;
>>>> +
>>>> + /* "alchemy-pcm-ac97" or "alchemy-pcm-i2s" */
>>>> + pdevname = (type == 0) ? AC97C_DMANAME : I2SC_DMANAME;
>>>> + pd = platform_device_alloc(pdevname, -1);
>>>> + if (!pd)
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> +
>>>> + pd->resource = res;
>>>> + pd->num_resources = 2;
>>>> +
>>>> + ret = platform_device_add(pd);
>>>> + if (!ret)
>>>> + return pd;
>>>> +
>>>> + platform_device_put(pd);
>>>> +out:
>>>> + kfree(res);
>>>> + return NULL;
>>>>> +}
>>>>
>>>> This function looks a bit fishy. The pcm driver should be registered by the
>>>> platform code file as well. If you need different DMA regions for I2C and AC97
>>>> use snd_soc_dai_set_dma_data and snd_soc_dai_get_dma_data to pass them to the
>>>> PCM driver from the I2S or AC97 driver.
>>>
>>> I like to pass the DMA id's along with the ac97/i2s resource
>>> information (since they
>>> belong together anyway). As an added benefit I get a sensibly named dma device
>>> with the correct DMA information, all by simply registering the ac97
>>> platform device.
>>
>> There is nothing wrong with passing the DMA ids along with the other AC97/I2C
>> resources. At least for the AC97 and I2C driver. But the PCM driver should use
>> snd_soc_dai_get_dma_data to get the DMA addresses at runtime rather then during
>> device instantiation. Take a look at how other platforms handle this.
>
>
> The ac97/i2s units know they need dma and therefore register the
> device themselves.
> Having the board code register an "empty" dma device along with the
> ac97/i2s devices
> seems like a waste of code and a source of potential bugs. I'll change my code.
If you are worried somebody might forget to register the pcm device when
registering the ac97/i2s device provide a helper function which registers both.
- Lars
