Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl_asrc: add protection for the asrc of older version
On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 06:55:25AM +, S.j. Wang wrote:
> > Alternatively, I feel instead of error-out at here, should we add a HW
> > constraint or at least fence it off at the beginning of the hw_params()?
> > This
> > is actually nothing specific to the pair-request function but a hardware
> > constraint.
> How about add constraint in startup?
> static int fsl_asrc_dai_startup(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream,
>struct snd_soc_dai *dai)
> {
>struct fsl_asrc *asrc_priv = snd_soc_dai_get_drvdata(dai);
>
>if (asrc_priv->channel_bits == 3) {
>snd_pcm_hw_constraint_step(substream->runtime, 0,
> SNDRV_PCM_HW_PARAM_CHANNELS, 2);
>}
>
>return 0;
> }
Yes, that's definitely good - the general idea is that we should never
need to return an error from hw_params() as the constraints code will
have filtered out any invalid configurations before they get that far.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
RE: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl_asrc: add protection for the asrc of older version
Hi
>
> On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 06:55:25AM +, S.j. Wang wrote:
>
> > > Alternatively, I feel instead of error-out at here, should we add a
> > > HW constraint or at least fence it off at the beginning of the
> > > hw_params()? This is actually nothing specific to the pair-request
> > > function but a hardware constraint.
> >
> > How about add constraint in startup?
> > static int fsl_asrc_dai_startup(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream,
> >struct snd_soc_dai *dai) {
> >struct fsl_asrc *asrc_priv = snd_soc_dai_get_drvdata(dai);
> >
> >if (asrc_priv->channel_bits == 3) {
> >snd_pcm_hw_constraint_step(substream->runtime, 0,
> > SNDRV_PCM_HW_PARAM_CHANNELS, 2);
> >}
> >
> >return 0;
> > }
>
> Yea, that looks good to me. Better to have a line of comments to tell that
> "bits==3" means older version -- maybe we should have something much
> more clear than using channel_bits but it is fine for now since they only
> differ here.
Ok , will send v2.
Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl_asrc: add protection for the asrc of older version
On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 06:55:25AM +, S.j. Wang wrote:
> > Alternatively, I feel instead of error-out at here, should we add a HW
> > constraint or at least fence it off at the beginning of the hw_params()?
> > This
> > is actually nothing specific to the pair-request function but a hardware
> > constraint.
>
> How about add constraint in startup?
> static int fsl_asrc_dai_startup(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream,
>struct snd_soc_dai *dai)
> {
>struct fsl_asrc *asrc_priv = snd_soc_dai_get_drvdata(dai);
>
>if (asrc_priv->channel_bits == 3) {
>snd_pcm_hw_constraint_step(substream->runtime, 0,
> SNDRV_PCM_HW_PARAM_CHANNELS, 2);
>}
>
>return 0;
> }
Yea, that looks good to me. Better to have a line of comments
to tell that "bits==3" means older version -- maybe we should
have something much more clear than using channel_bits but it
is fine for now since they only differ here.
RE: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl_asrc: add protection for the asrc of older version
Hi
>
> Hi Shengjiu,
>
> On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 02:32:38AM +, S.j. Wang wrote:
> > There is a constraint for the channel number setting on the asrc of
> > older version (e.g. imx35), the channel number should be even, odd
> > number isn't valid.
> >
> > So add protection when the asrc of older version is used.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang
> > ---
> > sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c | 3 ++-
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c index
> > 528e8b108422..b3b3c5e15ef1 100644
> > --- a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c
> > +++ b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c
> > @@ -109,7 +109,8 @@ static int fsl_asrc_request_pair(int channels, struct
> fsl_asrc_pair *pair)
> > if (index == ASRC_INVALID_PAIR) {
> > dev_err(dev, "all pairs are busy now\n");
> > ret = -EBUSY;
> > - } else if (asrc_priv->channel_avail < channels) {
> > + } else if (asrc_priv->channel_avail < channels ||
> > + (asrc_priv->channel_bits < 4 && channels % 2 != 0)) {
> > dev_err(dev, "can't afford required channels: %d\n",
> channels);
>
> I feel it'd be better to have another else-if, since the existing error
> message
> is against something else.
>
> + } else if (asrc_priv->channel_bits < 4 && channels & 1) {
> + /* old version of ASRC has channel_bits = 3 */
> + dev_err(dev, "does not support odd channel number\n");
> + ret = -EINVAL;
>
> Alternatively, I feel instead of error-out at here, should we add a HW
> constraint or at least fence it off at the beginning of the hw_params()? This
> is actually nothing specific to the pair-request function but a hardware
> constraint.
How about add constraint in startup?
static int fsl_asrc_dai_startup(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream,
struct snd_soc_dai *dai)
{
struct fsl_asrc *asrc_priv = snd_soc_dai_get_drvdata(dai);
if (asrc_priv->channel_bits == 3) {
snd_pcm_hw_constraint_step(substream->runtime, 0,
SNDRV_PCM_HW_PARAM_CHANNELS, 2);
}
return 0;
}
Best regards
Wang shengjiu
Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl_asrc: add protection for the asrc of older version
Hi Shengjiu,
On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 02:32:38AM +, S.j. Wang wrote:
> There is a constraint for the channel number setting on the
> asrc of older version (e.g. imx35), the channel number should
> be even, odd number isn't valid.
>
> So add protection when the asrc of older version is used.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang
> ---
> sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c
> index 528e8b108422..b3b3c5e15ef1 100644
> --- a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c
> +++ b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c
> @@ -109,7 +109,8 @@ static int fsl_asrc_request_pair(int channels, struct
> fsl_asrc_pair *pair)
> if (index == ASRC_INVALID_PAIR) {
> dev_err(dev, "all pairs are busy now\n");
> ret = -EBUSY;
> - } else if (asrc_priv->channel_avail < channels) {
> + } else if (asrc_priv->channel_avail < channels ||
> + (asrc_priv->channel_bits < 4 && channels % 2 != 0)) {
> dev_err(dev, "can't afford required channels: %d\n", channels);
I feel it'd be better to have another else-if, since the existing
error message is against something else.
+ } else if (asrc_priv->channel_bits < 4 && channels & 1) {
+ /* old version of ASRC has channel_bits = 3 */
+ dev_err(dev, "does not support odd channel number\n");
+ ret = -EINVAL;
Alternatively, I feel instead of error-out at here, should we add
a HW constraint or at least fence it off at the beginning of the
hw_params()? This is actually nothing specific to the pair-request
function but a hardware constraint.
