On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 4:48 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 30-10-18 15:38, Dean Wallace wrote: > > Excellent work Hans. Compiled 4.19 with > > 0001-ASoC-intel-cht_bsw_max98090_ti-Use-pmc_plt_clk_0-ins.patch, sound > > works as before. > > > > for i in /sys/kernel/debug/clk/pmc_plt_clk_?; do echo -n "$i: "; cat $i/clk_flags; echo; done > > /sys/kernel/debug/clk/pmc_plt_clk_0: > > /sys/kernel/debug/clk/pmc_plt_clk_1: > > /sys/kernel/debug/clk/pmc_plt_clk_2: > > /sys/kernel/debug/clk/pmc_plt_clk_3: > > /sys/kernel/debug/clk/pmc_plt_clk_4: > > /sys/kernel/debug/clk/pmc_plt_clk_5: > > Ok, so as I expected the Swanky is using pmc_plt_clk_0 > as mclk instead of pmc_plt_clk_3. Now the question > becomes is this true for all the designs using the > max98090 codec? > 1) Unconditionally use pmc_plt_clk_0 as mclk (as my test patch does) > in the cht_bsw_max98090_ti.c machine driver I don't know the details, but the main question here indeed do we ever had a working example of that machine with CLK #3 in use? P.S. I would go your first proposal until the opposite will be proved. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
