[RFC 0/4] FIFO caused playback delay (latency) handling in soc

[RFC 0/4] FIFO caused playback delay (latency) handling in soc

[Peter Ujfalusi]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2301 bytes --]

Hello,

There has been discussion in alsa-devel in this subject several times,
but no actual patches has been sent.

Based on the available information the latency caused by the HW buffer
on some systems can be handled by updating the runtime->delay.

It has been discussed, that the runtime->delay can also be updated
dynamically to show more accurate delay.

To further complicate things, in ASoC we could have more buffer in the
chain. To handle this we need soc level support.

This RFC series tries to do that in soc by:
- introducing a pcm_pointer wrapper
- in this wrapper we call the original pcm_pointer functions to get the
  DMA pointer
- introducing a new interface in dai_ops to ask the delay from the dais
- adding the cpu_dai and codec_dai returned delay to form the actual
  delay
- update the runtime->delay with this value.

With this approach none of the existing drivers need change, but they
can add support for specifying the FIFO caused delay.

In this series on top of the core changes the omap(3) code is updated
to take this delay reporting into use.
I have not added the support to the tlv320dac33 codec driver, since it
needs a bit more work, but along the same line it can be done, and if
the tlv320dac33 is hooked to omap McBSP than applications can know the
whole delay/latency on that path.

Since this is for RFC, I have based it on sound-2.6 topc/asoc branch,
which does not have the McBSP regcache nor the sidetone patches, but I
would like to get feedback on this method first than create a proper
series.

I have left out linux-omap from this RFC round, since the problem
is ALSA related.

Thank you,
Péter Ujfalusi

---
Peter Ujfalusi (4):
  ASoC: core: soc level wrapper for pcm_pointer callback
  ASoC: core: Add delay operation to snd_soc_dai_ops
  OMAP3: McBSP: Add interface for transmit FIFO state query
  ASoC: OMAP3: Report delay on playback caused by the internal FIFO

 arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/mcbsp.h |    4 +++
 arch/arm/plat-omap/mcbsp.c              |   27 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
 include/sound/soc-dai.h                 |    6 +++++
 sound/soc/omap/omap-mcbsp.c             |   26 +++++++++++++++++++++++
 sound/soc/soc-core.c                    |   34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 5 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@alsa-project.org
http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel

[RFC 1/4] ASoC: core: soc level wrapper for pcm_pointer callback

[Peter Ujfalusi]

Create a soc level wrapper for pcm_pointer callbacks.
This will facilitate the soc level handling of different
HW buffers in the audio path.

Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@nokia.com>
---
 sound/soc/soc-core.c |   19 ++++++++++++++++++-
 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sound/soc/soc-core.c b/sound/soc/soc-core.c
index a03bac9..6e35741 100644
--- a/sound/soc/soc-core.c
+++ b/sound/soc/soc-core.c
@@ -797,6 +797,23 @@ static int soc_pcm_trigger(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream, int cmd)
 	return 0;
 }
 
+/*
+ * soc level wrapper for pointer and pcm_delay handling
+ */
+static snd_pcm_uframes_t soc_pcm_pointer(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream)
+{
+	struct snd_soc_pcm_runtime *rtd = substream->private_data;
+	struct snd_soc_device *socdev = rtd->socdev;
+	struct snd_soc_card *card = socdev->card;
+	struct snd_soc_platform *platform = card->platform;
+	snd_pcm_uframes_t offset = 0;
+
+	if (platform->pcm_ops->pointer)
+		offset = platform->pcm_ops->pointer(substream);
+
+	return offset;
+}
+
 /* ASoC PCM operations */
 static struct snd_pcm_ops soc_pcm_ops = {
 	.open		= soc_pcm_open,
@@ -805,6 +822,7 @@ static struct snd_pcm_ops soc_pcm_ops = {
 	.hw_free	= soc_pcm_hw_free,
 	.prepare	= soc_pcm_prepare,
 	.trigger	= soc_pcm_trigger,
+	.pointer	= soc_pcm_pointer,
 };
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_PM
@@ -1331,7 +1349,6 @@ static int soc_new_pcm(struct snd_soc_device *socdev,
 	dai_link->pcm = pcm;
 	pcm->private_data = rtd;
 	soc_pcm_ops.mmap = platform->pcm_ops->mmap;
-	soc_pcm_ops.pointer = platform->pcm_ops->pointer;
 	soc_pcm_ops.ioctl = platform->pcm_ops->ioctl;
 	soc_pcm_ops.copy = platform->pcm_ops->copy;
 	soc_pcm_ops.silence = platform->pcm_ops->silence;
-- 
1.7.0

[RFC 2/4] ASoC: core: Add delay operation to snd_soc_dai_ops

[Peter Ujfalusi]

The delay calback can be used by the core to query the delay
on the dais caused by FIFO.
In case if both CPU and CODEC dai has FIFO the delay reported
by each will be added to form the full delay on the chain.
If none of the dai has FIFO, than the delay will be kept as
zero.

Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@nokia.com>
---
 include/sound/soc-dai.h |    6 ++++++
 sound/soc/soc-core.c    |   15 +++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/sound/soc-dai.h b/include/sound/soc-dai.h
index 061f16d..be9cd47 100644
--- a/include/sound/soc-dai.h
+++ b/include/sound/soc-dai.h
@@ -182,6 +182,12 @@ struct snd_soc_dai_ops {
 		struct snd_soc_dai *);
 	int (*trigger)(struct snd_pcm_substream *, int,
 		struct snd_soc_dai *);
+	/*
+	 * For hardware based FIFO caused delay reporting.
+	 * Optional.
+	 */
+	snd_pcm_sframes_t (*delay)(struct snd_pcm_substream *,
+		struct snd_soc_dai *);
 };
 
 /*
diff --git a/sound/soc/soc-core.c b/sound/soc/soc-core.c
index 6e35741..feaf03b 100644
--- a/sound/soc/soc-core.c
+++ b/sound/soc/soc-core.c
@@ -806,11 +806,26 @@ static snd_pcm_uframes_t soc_pcm_pointer(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream)
 	struct snd_soc_device *socdev = rtd->socdev;
 	struct snd_soc_card *card = socdev->card;
 	struct snd_soc_platform *platform = card->platform;
+	struct snd_soc_dai_link *machine = rtd->dai;
+	struct snd_soc_dai *cpu_dai = machine->cpu_dai;
+	struct snd_soc_dai *codec_dai = machine->codec_dai;
+	struct snd_pcm_runtime *runtime = substream->runtime;
 	snd_pcm_uframes_t offset = 0;
+	snd_pcm_sframes_t delay = 0;
 
 	if (platform->pcm_ops->pointer)
 		offset = platform->pcm_ops->pointer(substream);
 
+	/* Query the delay only for playback stream */
+	if (substream->stream == SNDRV_PCM_STREAM_PLAYBACK) {
+		if (cpu_dai->ops->delay)
+			delay += cpu_dai->ops->delay(substream, cpu_dai);
+
+		if (codec_dai->ops->delay)
+			delay += codec_dai->ops->delay(substream, codec_dai);
+
+		runtime->delay = delay;
+	}
 	return offset;
 }
 
-- 
1.7.0

Re: [RFC 2/4] ASoC: core: Add delay operation to snd_soc_dai_ops

[Mark Brown]

On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 03:39:49PM +0200, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:

> +	/* Query the delay only for playback stream */
> +	if (substream->stream == SNDRV_PCM_STREAM_PLAYBACK) {
> +		if (cpu_dai->ops->delay)
> +			delay += cpu_dai->ops->delay(substream, cpu_dai);
> +
> +		if (codec_dai->ops->delay)
> +			delay += codec_dai->ops->delay(substream, codec_dai);
> +
> +		runtime->delay = delay;
> +	}

I'd be inclined to leave this up to the drivers to avoid surprises if it
becomes useful for the capture case in the future.  Not sure that that's
likely, but I'd rather avoid potential future transitions.

Re: [RFC 2/4] ASoC: core: Add delay operation to snd_soc_dai_ops

[Peter Ujfalusi]

On Tuesday 02 March 2010 15:45:08 ext Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 03:39:49PM +0200, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> > +	/* Query the delay only for playback stream */
> > +	if (substream->stream == SNDRV_PCM_STREAM_PLAYBACK) {
> > +		if (cpu_dai->ops->delay)
> > +			delay += cpu_dai->ops->delay(substream, cpu_dai);
> > +
> > +		if (codec_dai->ops->delay)
> > +			delay += codec_dai->ops->delay(substream, codec_dai);
> > +
> > +		runtime->delay = delay;
> > +	}
> 
> I'd be inclined to leave this up to the drivers to avoid surprises if it
> becomes useful for the capture case in the future.  Not sure that that's
> likely, but I'd rather avoid potential future transitions.

Sure, actually I have added this check later, since I had some trouble to make 
sensible reporting on the capture path.
But sure, I can remove this check and leave it to the dais to deal with.

Thanks
Peter

Re: [RFC 2/4] ASoC: core: Add delay operation to snd_soc_dai_ops

[Mark Brown]

On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 03:49:33PM +0200, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:

> Sure, actually I have added this check later, since I had some trouble to make 
> sensible reporting on the capture path.
> But sure, I can remove this check and leave it to the dais to deal with.

Yeah, I'm not convinced it's going to get used for capture but it seems
a little easier to allow it rather than have to transition later.  It's
also consistent with all the other ops.

[RFC 3/4] OMAP3: McBSP: Add interface for transmit FIFO state query

[Peter Ujfalusi]

New function for reading the XBUFFSTAT register, which holds
the fill state of the transmit buffer on McBSP.

Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@nokia.com>
---
 arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/mcbsp.h |    4 ++++
 arch/arm/plat-omap/mcbsp.c              |   27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/mcbsp.h b/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/mcbsp.h
index 4f22e5b..98de3d4 100644
--- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/mcbsp.h
+++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/mcbsp.h
@@ -147,6 +147,8 @@
 #define OMAP_MCBSP_REG_WAKEUPEN	0xA8
 #define OMAP_MCBSP_REG_XCCR	0xAC
 #define OMAP_MCBSP_REG_RCCR	0xB0
+#define OMAP_MCBSP_REG_XBUFFSTAT	0xB4
+#define OMAP_MCBSP_REG_RBUFFSTAT	0xB8
 
 #define AUDIO_MCBSP_DATAWRITE	(OMAP24XX_MCBSP2_BASE + OMAP_MCBSP_REG_DXR1)
 #define AUDIO_MCBSP_DATAREAD	(OMAP24XX_MCBSP2_BASE + OMAP_MCBSP_REG_DRR1)
@@ -428,6 +430,7 @@ void omap_mcbsp_set_tx_threshold(unsigned int id, u16 threshold);
 void omap_mcbsp_set_rx_threshold(unsigned int id, u16 threshold);
 u16 omap_mcbsp_get_max_tx_threshold(unsigned int id);
 u16 omap_mcbsp_get_max_rx_threshold(unsigned int id);
+u16 omap_mcbsp_get_tx_buffstat(unsigned int id);
 int omap_mcbsp_get_dma_op_mode(unsigned int id);
 #else
 static inline void omap_mcbsp_set_tx_threshold(unsigned int id, u16 threshold)
@@ -436,6 +439,7 @@ static inline void omap_mcbsp_set_rx_threshold(unsigned int id, u16 threshold)
 { }
 static inline u16 omap_mcbsp_get_max_tx_threshold(unsigned int id) { return 0; }
 static inline u16 omap_mcbsp_get_max_rx_threshold(unsigned int id) { return 0; }
+static inline u16 omap_mcbsp_get_tx_buffstat(unsigned int id) { return 0; }
 static inline int omap_mcbsp_get_dma_op_mode(unsigned int id) { return 0; }
 #endif
 int omap_mcbsp_request(unsigned int id);
diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-omap/mcbsp.c b/arch/arm/plat-omap/mcbsp.c
index f757672..e49af86 100644
--- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/mcbsp.c
+++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/mcbsp.c
@@ -284,6 +284,33 @@ u16 omap_mcbsp_get_max_rx_threshold(unsigned int id)
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(omap_mcbsp_get_max_rx_threshold);
 
 /*
+ * omap_mcbsp_get_tx_buffstat returns the number of used slots in the McBSP FIFO
+ */
+u16 omap_mcbsp_get_tx_buffstat(unsigned int id)
+{
+	struct omap_mcbsp *mcbsp;
+	u16 buffstat;
+
+	if (!omap_mcbsp_check_valid_id(id)) {
+		printk(KERN_ERR "%s: Invalid id (%d)\n", __func__, id + 1);
+		return -ENODEV;
+	}
+	mcbsp = id_to_mcbsp_ptr(id);
+
+	/* Returns the number of free locations in the buffer */
+	buffstat = OMAP_MCBSP_READ(mcbsp->io_base, XBUFFSTAT);
+
+	/* Number of free slots on McBSP ports */
+	if (mcbsp->id == 2)
+		buffstat = 0x500 - buffstat;
+	else
+		buffstat = 0x80 - buffstat;
+
+	return buffstat;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(omap_mcbsp_get_tx_buffstat);
+
+/*
  * omap_mcbsp_get_dma_op_mode just return the current configured
  * operating mode for the mcbsp channel
  */
-- 
1.7.0

Re: [RFC 3/4] OMAP3: McBSP: Add interface for transmit FIFO state query

[Mark Brown]

On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 03:39:50PM +0200, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> New function for reading the XBUFFSTAT register, which holds
> the fill state of the transmit buffer on McBSP.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@nokia.com>

It'd be really nice if this could go into 2.6.34 to avoid cross-tree
issues but for that you'd need to submit via OMAP.  It'll need their
ack anyway.

Re: [RFC 3/4] OMAP3: McBSP: Add interface for transmit FIFO state query

[Eero Nurkkala]

On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 14:39 +0100, Ujfalusi Peter (Nokia-D/Tampere)
wrote:
> New function for reading the XBUFFSTAT register, which holds
> the fill state of the transmit buffer on McBSP.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@nokia.com>
> ---

Reading the XBUFFSTAT register is by no means accurate.
IIRC, it reports the buffer status incorrectly about 1/50 times
on average (@ 48000khz); with simple math, it may be read during the DMA
burst. Or is it guaranteed not being read during DMA transfer / have
you otherwise verified the behavior?

- Eero

>  arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/mcbsp.h |    4 ++++
>  arch/arm/plat-omap/mcbsp.c              |   27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/mcbsp.h b/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/mcbsp.h
> index 4f22e5b..98de3d4 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/mcbsp.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/mcbsp.h
> @@ -147,6 +147,8 @@
>  #define OMAP_MCBSP_REG_WAKEUPEN	0xA8
>  #define OMAP_MCBSP_REG_XCCR	0xAC
>  #define OMAP_MCBSP_REG_RCCR	0xB0
> +#define OMAP_MCBSP_REG_XBUFFSTAT	0xB4
> +#define OMAP_MCBSP_REG_RBUFFSTAT	0xB8
>  
>  #define AUDIO_MCBSP_DATAWRITE	(OMAP24XX_MCBSP2_BASE + OMAP_MCBSP_REG_DXR1)
>  #define AUDIO_MCBSP_DATAREAD	(OMAP24XX_MCBSP2_BASE + OMAP_MCBSP_REG_DRR1)
> @@ -428,6 +430,7 @@ void omap_mcbsp_set_tx_threshold(unsigned int id, u16 threshold);
>  void omap_mcbsp_set_rx_threshold(unsigned int id, u16 threshold);
>  u16 omap_mcbsp_get_max_tx_threshold(unsigned int id);
>  u16 omap_mcbsp_get_max_rx_threshold(unsigned int id);
> +u16 omap_mcbsp_get_tx_buffstat(unsigned int id);
>  int omap_mcbsp_get_dma_op_mode(unsigned int id);
>  #else
>  static inline void omap_mcbsp_set_tx_threshold(unsigned int id, u16 threshold)
> @@ -436,6 +439,7 @@ static inline void omap_mcbsp_set_rx_threshold(unsigned int id, u16 threshold)
>  { }
>  static inline u16 omap_mcbsp_get_max_tx_threshold(unsigned int id) { return 0; }
>  static inline u16 omap_mcbsp_get_max_rx_threshold(unsigned int id) { return 0; }
> +static inline u16 omap_mcbsp_get_tx_buffstat(unsigned int id) { return 0; }
>  static inline int omap_mcbsp_get_dma_op_mode(unsigned int id) { return 0; }
>  #endif
>  int omap_mcbsp_request(unsigned int id);
> diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-omap/mcbsp.c b/arch/arm/plat-omap/mcbsp.c
> index f757672..e49af86 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/mcbsp.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/mcbsp.c
> @@ -284,6 +284,33 @@ u16 omap_mcbsp_get_max_rx_threshold(unsigned int id)
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(omap_mcbsp_get_max_rx_threshold);
>  
>  /*
> + * omap_mcbsp_get_tx_buffstat returns the number of used slots in the McBSP FIFO
> + */
> +u16 omap_mcbsp_get_tx_buffstat(unsigned int id)
> +{
> +	struct omap_mcbsp *mcbsp;
> +	u16 buffstat;
> +
> +	if (!omap_mcbsp_check_valid_id(id)) {
> +		printk(KERN_ERR "%s: Invalid id (%d)\n", __func__, id + 1);
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +	}
> +	mcbsp = id_to_mcbsp_ptr(id);
> +
> +	/* Returns the number of free locations in the buffer */
> +	buffstat = OMAP_MCBSP_READ(mcbsp->io_base, XBUFFSTAT);
> +
> +	/* Number of free slots on McBSP ports */
> +	if (mcbsp->id == 2)
> +		buffstat = 0x500 - buffstat;
> +	else
> +		buffstat = 0x80 - buffstat;
> +
> +	return buffstat;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(omap_mcbsp_get_tx_buffstat);
> +
> +/*
>   * omap_mcbsp_get_dma_op_mode just return the current configured
>   * operating mode for the mcbsp channel
>   */

Re: [RFC 3/4] OMAP3: McBSP: Add interface for transmit FIFO state query

[Liam Girdwood]

On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 15:52 +0200, Eero Nurkkala wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 14:39 +0100, Ujfalusi Peter (Nokia-D/Tampere)
> wrote:
> > New function for reading the XBUFFSTAT register, which holds
> > the fill state of the transmit buffer on McBSP.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@nokia.com>
> > ---
> 
> Reading the XBUFFSTAT register is by no means accurate.
> IIRC, it reports the buffer status incorrectly about 1/50 times
> on average (@ 48000khz); with simple math, it may be read during the DMA
> burst. Or is it guaranteed not being read during DMA transfer / have
> you otherwise verified the behavior?

I agree, I've also seen XBUFFSTAT giving complete garbage with mcbsp3.

Liam 

-- 
Freelance Developer, SlimLogic Ltd
ASoC and Voltage Regulator Maintainer.
http://www.slimlogic.co.uk

Re: [RFC 3/4] OMAP3: McBSP: Add interface for transmit FIFO state query

[Peter Ujfalusi]

On Tuesday 02 March 2010 15:52:00 Nurkkala Eero.An (EXT-Offcode/Oulu) wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 14:39 +0100, Ujfalusi Peter (Nokia-D/Tampere)
> 
> wrote:
> > New function for reading the XBUFFSTAT register, which holds
> > the fill state of the transmit buffer on McBSP.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@nokia.com>
> > ---
> 
> Reading the XBUFFSTAT register is by no means accurate.
> IIRC, it reports the buffer status incorrectly about 1/50 times
> on average (@ 48000khz); with simple math, it may be read during the DMA
> burst. Or is it guaranteed not being read during DMA transfer / have
> you otherwise verified the behavior?

That is one side, the other is that since the interface is running on the L4 
domain, the actual buffer fill level might be different inside...
But it is not guarantied that the DMA is not running.
The pointer callback is usually called after the driver calls the elapsed, which 
in our case is when the DMA finished it's burst.
So, yes it is not going to be precise, but it is still going to be better than 
it is now.
I did run some tests, and the delay numbers reported looked reasonable.
In element mode on McBSP2 the delay was 640 samples in some cases dropped to 
639.
In threshold mode, hmm I lost the log. But it was fluctuating, but that is 
expected. I'll do some tests on this.


> 
> - Eero
> 

-- 
Péter

Re: [RFC 3/4] OMAP3: McBSP: Add interface for transmit FIFO state query

[Jarkko Nikula]

On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 15:52:00 +0200
Eero Nurkkala <ext-eero.nurkkala@nokia.com> wrote:

> Reading the XBUFFSTAT register is by no means accurate.
> IIRC, it reports the buffer status incorrectly about 1/50 times
> on average (@ 48000khz); with simple math, it may be read during the DMA
> burst. Or is it guaranteed not being read during DMA transfer / have
> you otherwise verified the behavior?
> 
Do you remember how big was this variation? Was it near the burst size
or some arbitrary difference?


-- 
Jarkko

Re: [RFC 3/4] OMAP3: McBSP: Add interface for transmit FIFO state query

[Eero Nurkkala]

On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 15:06 +0100, ext Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 15:52:00 +0200
> Eero Nurkkala <ext-eero.nurkkala@nokia.com> wrote:
> 
> > Reading the XBUFFSTAT register is by no means accurate.
> > IIRC, it reports the buffer status incorrectly about 1/50 times
> > on average (@ 48000khz); with simple math, it may be read during the DMA
> > burst. Or is it guaranteed not being read during DMA transfer / have
> > you otherwise verified the behavior?
> > 
> Do you remember how big was this variation? Was it near the burst size
> or some arbitrary difference?
> 
> 

Mostly the samples were good (49/50, @48khz, 2 channels, value polled
from userpace), but the remaining 1/50 were garbage - and actually
matched the probability of a simultaneous DMA burst. So the problem is -
if you read at time t0, and the DMA burst is taking place at the same
time - you get a value that looks rather random, as when (if) you poll
the position @ t0 + n uS, the value is (after some usecs) a lot
different. Or maybe the XBUFFSTAT just isn't reliable at all (regardless
of DMA bursts etc).

It's easy to check - at DMA IRQ, read out the XBUFFSTAT... if the range
is not valid, print a message...(to rule out the DMA bursts).

- Eero

Re: [RFC 3/4] OMAP3: McBSP: Add interface for transmit FIFO state query

[Jarkko Nikula]

On Wed, 03 Mar 2010 08:07:52 +0200
Eero Nurkkala <ext-eero.nurkkala@nokia.com> wrote:

> Mostly the samples were good (49/50, @48khz, 2 channels, value polled
> from userpace), but the remaining 1/50 were garbage - and actually
> matched the probability of a simultaneous DMA burst. So the problem is -
> if you read at time t0, and the DMA burst is taking place at the same
> time - you get a value that looks rather random, as when (if) you poll
> the position @ t0 + n uS, the value is (after some usecs) a lot
> different. Or maybe the XBUFFSTAT just isn't reliable at all (regardless
> of DMA bursts etc).
> 
Yeah, that's interesting to find out are the XBUFFSTAT reading
differences inside the DMA burst size or distributed completely
randomly. I think the XBUFFSTAT should increase at the sample rate and
decrease or jump down fast when the DMA burst takes place.


-- 
Jarkko

Re: [RFC 3/4] OMAP3: McBSP: Add interface for transmit FIFO state query

[Peter Ujfalusi]

On Wednesday 03 March 2010 09:03:24 ext Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Mar 2010 08:07:52 +0200
> 
> Eero Nurkkala <ext-eero.nurkkala@nokia.com> wrote:
> > Mostly the samples were good (49/50, @48khz, 2 channels, value polled
> > from userpace), but the remaining 1/50 were garbage - and actually
> > matched the probability of a simultaneous DMA burst.

Yeah, but you can place the same argument for the DMA pointer as well:
If you read the pointer in a right time (very close to the start of the burst), 
than you have the same problem, since after few usec the DMA pointer will be at 
the end of the period, right?

> > So the problem is -
> > if you read at time t0, and the DMA burst is taking place at the same
> > time - you get a value that looks rather random, as when (if) you poll
> > the position @ t0 + n uS, the value is (after some usecs) a lot
> > different. Or maybe the XBUFFSTAT just isn't reliable at all (regardless
> > of DMA bursts etc).

Yes, the XBUFFSTAT is not that reliable, it shows the buffer state at the last 
L4 clock phase. If the diff between the L4 speed and the audio is big enough, 
than you will have old data in the register, which does not reflect the reality. 
As far as I understand.

> 
> Yeah, that's interesting to find out are the XBUFFSTAT reading
> differences inside the DMA burst size or distributed completely
> randomly. I think the XBUFFSTAT should increase at the sample rate and
> decrease or jump down fast when the DMA burst takes place.

Anyhow, I have done few tests (McBSP2):
printing XBUFFSTAT before trigger:start
printing XBUFFSTAT right after trigger:start
printing XBUFFSTAT at the pointer call time
print at DMA interrupt
printing XBUFFSTAT before trigger:stop
printing XBUFFSTAT right after trigger:stop

The command for test:
aplay -fdat -d 1 /dev/urandom

In element mode:
[   96.211364] Start 01
[   96.213592] XBUFFSTAT: 1280  # before omap_mcbsp_start
[   96.216918] XBUFFSTAT: 0     # after omap_mcbsp_start
[   96.219451] Start 02
[   96.244415] XBUFFSTAT: 0     # at pointer.
[   96.246978] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.249542] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.253265] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.255859] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.259033] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.261596] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.264404] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.267791] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.270324] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.272888] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.276458] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.279022] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.282165] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.284729] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.287536] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.290924] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.293487] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.296020] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.299774] XBUFFSTAT: 1
[   96.302459] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.305847] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.308471] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.311035] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.314666] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.317230] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.319793] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.323150] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.325744] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   96.328399] DMA              # DMA interrupt
[   96.330169] XBUFFSTAT: 0     # at pointer.
...
[   97.201904] DMA
[   97.203704] XBUFFSTAT: 0
[   97.206237] Stop 01
[   97.208343] XBUFFSTAT: 203   # before omap_mcbsp_stop
[   97.211090] XBUFFSTAT: 1280  # after omap_mcbsp_stop
[   97.213897] Stop 02

So the buffer is kept full in element mode, as it is expected.

Now the interesting thin is in threshold mode (threshold = 1023):
[  288.093475] Start 01
[  288.095703] XBUFFSTAT: 1280  # before omap_mcbsp_start
[  288.099029] XBUFFSTAT: 257   # after omap_mcbsp_start (257+1023=1280), OK
[  288.101745] Start 02
[  288.104003] DMA
[  288.105773] XBUFFSTAT: 904
[  288.108520] DMA
[  288.110260] XBUFFSTAT: 311
[  288.117706] XBUFFSTAT: 1024
[  288.120513] DMA
[  288.122283] XBUFFSTAT: 442
[  288.127929] XBUFFSTAT: 982
[  288.130645] DMA
[  288.132415] XBUFFSTAT: 391
[  288.137969] XBUFFSTAT: 923
[  288.140686] DMA
[  288.142456] XBUFFSTAT: 331
[  288.147796] XBUFFSTAT: 844
[  288.150573] DMA
[  288.152343] XBUFFSTAT: 257
[  288.157867] XBUFFSTAT: 787
[  288.160614] DMA
[  288.162384] XBUFFSTAT: 196
[  288.168395] XBUFFSTAT: 774
[  288.171142] DMA
[  288.172912] XBUFFSTAT: 183
[  288.178466] XBUFFSTAT: 717
...
[  288.565612] DMA
[  288.567382] XBUFFSTAT: 182
[  288.572509] XBUFFSTAT: 673
[  288.576263] DMA
[  288.578033] XBUFFSTAT: 181
[  288.583007] XBUFFSTAT: 659
[  288.586944] DMA
[  288.588714] XBUFFSTAT: 182
[  288.597595] DMA
[  288.599365] XBUFFSTAT: 182
[  288.608245] DMA
[  288.610015] XBUFFSTAT: 182
[  288.618896] DMA
[  288.620697] XBUFFSTAT: 182
[  288.629577] DMA
[  288.631347] XBUFFSTAT: 182
[  288.640228] DMA
...
[  289.077331] DMA
[  289.079101] XBUFFSTAT: 182
[  289.087982] DMA
[  289.089752] XBUFFSTAT: 181
[  289.092498] Stop 01
[  289.094604] XBUFFSTAT: 646   # before omap_mcbsp_stop
[  289.097320] XBUFFSTAT: 1280  # after omap_mcbsp_stop
[  289.100128] Stop 02

These numbers were in a same range (variation was around 10) among several 
rounds.
Looking at the numbers, I think they are kind of sane.
After DMA interrupt the buffer has more data than a bit later, when the pointer 
is called (McBSP played out samples).
One thing that I don't really understand is in the second block: suddenly we 
have only one pointer call in response to snd_pcm_period_elapsed(substream); 
while earlier we had one extra pointer call...

let's take one part out:
[  288.160614] DMA
[  288.162384] XBUFFSTAT: 196
[  288.168395] XBUFFSTAT: 774

If application would write a sample at 288.162384, than it will be played out 
after 542 stereo samples [(1280 - 196 = 1084) / 2].
If application would write a sample at 288.168395, than it will be played out 
after 253 stereo samples [(1280 - 774 = 506) / 2].
The difference between these in samples: 542 - 253 = 289
The time difference is: 288.168395 - 288.162384 = 0.006011
In 0.006011 seconds at 48KHz the number of samples played out is 288.528

So according to XBUFSTAT we have played out 289 samples.
based on the time we actually played 288.528 samples.

I would say this is really close to what we would expect to have?

Note: I have used printk for these, which pretty much alters the behavior a bit 
in timing wise...

-- 
Péter

Re: [RFC 3/4] OMAP3: McBSP: Add interface for transmit FIFO state query

[Peter Ujfalusi]

On Wednesday 03 March 2010 12:02:48 Ujfalusi Peter (Nokia-D/Tampere) wrote:
> Anyhow, I have done few tests (McBSP2):
> printing XBUFFSTAT before trigger:start
> printing XBUFFSTAT right after trigger:start
> printing XBUFFSTAT at the pointer call time
> print at DMA interrupt

In DMA interrupt I only printed out "DMA" and have not printed the XBUFFSTAT.
XBUFFSTAT is only printed at the next pointer/delay call.
Probably it would be also good to print at DMA interrupt, if there is a 
demand...

> printing XBUFFSTAT before trigger:stop
> printing XBUFFSTAT right after trigger:stop
> 

-- 
Péter

Re: [RFC 3/4] OMAP3: McBSP: Add interface for transmit FIFO state query

[Jarkko Nikula]

On Wed, 3 Mar 2010 12:02:48 +0200
Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@nokia.com> wrote:

> The command for test:
> aplay -fdat -d 1 /dev/urandom
> 
I recommend to use /dev/zero instead since urandom takes CPU time.

> [   96.290924] XBUFFSTAT: 0
> [   96.293487] XBUFFSTAT: 0
> [   96.296020] XBUFFSTAT: 0
> [   96.299774] XBUFFSTAT: 1
> 
> So the buffer is kept full in element mode, as it is expected.
> 
I was expecting to see more variations. IRCC, the DMA in OMAP is doing
transfers over the memory bus using some small bursts but I'm not
completely sure. I'm thinking if that could explain the Eero's and
Liam's observations?

> So according to XBUFSTAT we have played out 289 samples.
> based on the time we actually played 288.528 samples.
> 
> I would say this is really close to what we would expect to have?
> 
Sounds accurate enough.

> Note: I have used printk for these, which pretty much alters the behavior a bit 
> in timing wise...
> 
BTW: There is OMAP3 port in LTTng.


-- 
Jarkko

Re: [RFC 3/4] OMAP3: McBSP: Add interface for transmit FIFO state query

[Peter Ujfalusi]

On Wednesday 03 March 2010 16:18:42 ext Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Mar 2010 12:02:48 +0200
> 
> Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@nokia.com> wrote:
> > The command for test:
> > aplay -fdat -d 1 /dev/urandom
> 
> I recommend to use /dev/zero instead since urandom takes CPU time.
> 
> > [   96.290924] XBUFFSTAT: 0
> > [   96.293487] XBUFFSTAT: 0
> > [   96.296020] XBUFFSTAT: 0
> > [   96.299774] XBUFFSTAT: 1
> > 
> > So the buffer is kept full in element mode, as it is expected.
> 
> I was expecting to see more variations. IRCC, the DMA in OMAP is doing
> transfers over the memory bus using some small bursts but I'm not
> completely sure. I'm thinking if that could explain the Eero's and
> Liam's observations?

I kind of expecting similar result (this).
In element mode the threshold value is 0 (1 word).
So if one word is free in McBSP buffer, than it will assert the DMA request 
line, and the DMA will write one word to McBSP.
So in theory the buffer must be kept full in this mode, with quite minimal 
variation.
But I might be wrong on this...

> 
> > So according to XBUFSTAT we have played out 289 samples.
> > based on the time we actually played 288.528 samples.
> > 
> > I would say this is really close to what we would expect to have?
> 
> Sounds accurate enough.
> 
> > Note: I have used printk for these, which pretty much alters the behavior
> > a bit in timing wise...
> 
> BTW: There is OMAP3 port in LTTng.

Thanks, I'll look at that, since this printk is altering the behavior too much.

-- 
Péter

Re: [RFC 3/4] OMAP3: McBSP: Add interface for transmit FIFO state query

[Peter Ujfalusi]

Hello,

On Wednesday 03 March 2010 17:01:39 Ujfalusi Peter (Nokia-D/Tampere) wrote:
> On Wednesday 03 March 2010 16:18:42 ext Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> > On Wed, 3 Mar 2010 12:02:48 +0200
> > 
> > Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@nokia.com> wrote:
> > > The command for test:
> > > aplay -fdat -d 1 /dev/urandom
> > 
> > I recommend to use /dev/zero instead since urandom takes CPU time.
> > 
> > > [   96.290924] XBUFFSTAT: 0
> > > [   96.293487] XBUFFSTAT: 0
> > > [   96.296020] XBUFFSTAT: 0
> > > [   96.299774] XBUFFSTAT: 1
> > > 
> > > So the buffer is kept full in element mode, as it is expected.
> > 
> > I was expecting to see more variations. IRCC, the DMA in OMAP is doing
> > transfers over the memory bus using some small bursts but I'm not
> > completely sure. I'm thinking if that could explain the Eero's and
> > Liam's observations?
> 
> I kind of expecting similar result (this).
> In element mode the threshold value is 0 (1 word).
> So if one word is free in McBSP buffer, than it will assert the DMA request
> line, and the DMA will write one word to McBSP.
> So in theory the buffer must be kept full in this mode, with quite minimal
> variation.
> But I might be wrong on this...

Well, to be precise, I expected that the XBUFFSTAT would have been 1 most of the 
time, and not 0.
But in stereo we are still within one sample accuracy, so I think this is OK.

-- 
Péter

Re: [RFC 3/4] OMAP3: McBSP: Add interface for transmit FIFO state query

[ext-Eero.Nurkkala]

From: Ujfalusi Peter

> So according to XBUFSTAT we have played out 289 samples.
> based on the time we actually played 288.528 samples.
> 
> I would say this is really close to what we would expect to have?
> 
> Note: I have used printk for these, which pretty much alters the behavior a bit
> in timing wise...
> 
> --
> Péter

There was something like this, reading XBUFFSTAT and RBUFFSTAT (adjacently), 
and comparing the diff, it should be 145 +-1 in this case, but that's not true:

(usespace app reading the values through a sysfs node):

1: tx: 247, rx: 101, (tx-rx):  146, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 146
2: tx: 377, rx: 232, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
3: tx: 136, rx: 471, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
4: tx:  40, rx: 375, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
5: tx:  63, rx: 398, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
6: tx: 444, rx: 299, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
7: tx: 330, rx: 185, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
8: tx: 198, rx:  53, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
9: tx: 453, rx: 308, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
10: tx: 459, rx: 313, (tx-rx):  146, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 146
11: tx: 353, rx: 208, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
12: tx: 435, rx: 290, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
13: tx: 421, rx: 276, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
14: tx: 397, rx: 251, (tx-rx):  146, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 146
15: tx: 297, rx: 151, (tx-rx):  146, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 146
16: tx: 341, rx: 196, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
17: tx: 347, rx: 202, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
18: tx: 298, rx: 153, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
19: tx: 341, rx: 196, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
20: tx: 121, rx: 456, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
21: tx: 109, rx: 444, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
22: tx: 465, rx: 320, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
23: tx: 300, rx: 155, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
24: tx: 217, rx:  72, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
25: tx: 361, rx: 216, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
26: tx: 443, rx: 298, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
27: tx: 325, rx: 180, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
28: tx: 398, rx: 252, (tx-rx):  146, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 146
29: tx: 346, rx: 201, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
30: tx: 474, rx: 329, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
31: tx: 323, rx: 178, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
32: tx: 349, rx: 204, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
33: tx: 202, rx:  57, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
34: tx: 462, rx: 317, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
35: tx:  87, rx: 422, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
36: tx: 407, rx: 262, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
37: tx: 354, rx: 209, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
38: tx: 377, rx: 232, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
39: tx: 435, rx: 290, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
40: tx: 456, rx: 311, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
41: tx: 466, rx: 321, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
42: tx: 349, rx: 204, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
43: tx: 328, rx: 183, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
44: tx: 385, rx: 240, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
45: tx: 115, rx: 450, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
46: tx: 297, rx: 152, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
47: tx: 332, rx: 187, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
48: tx: 298, rx: 153, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
49: tx: 432, rx: 286, (tx-rx):  146, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 146
50: tx:  99, rx: 434, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
51: tx:  96, rx: 431, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
52: tx: 380, rx: 235, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
53: tx: 417, rx: 272, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
54: tx: 272, rx: 337, (tx-rx):  -65, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 415 < NOK
55: tx: 391, rx: 246, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
56: tx: 305, rx: 336, (tx-rx):  -31, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 449 < NOK

what went wrong? (the pcm pointer w/dma pos never missed that
greatly)
Very unlikely that an IRQ just happened to come in between the
register reads..with that frequency (> 1/50)

so subjectively XBUFFSTAT / RBUFFSTAT are not useful for
any "real" use...

- Eero

Re: [RFC 3/4] OMAP3: McBSP: Add interface for transmit FIFO state query

[ext-Eero.Nurkkala]

> what went wrong? (the pcm pointer w/dma pos never missed that
> greatly)
> Very unlikely that an IRQ just happened to come in between the
> register reads..with that frequency (> 1/50)

Just to make sure:

+void omap_mcbsp_buffstat(unsigned int id, unsigned int *xbuffstat,
+				unsigned int *rbuffstat)
+{
+	struct omap_mcbsp *mcbsp;
+
+	if (!(cpu_is_omap2430() || cpu_is_omap34xx()))
+		return;
+
+	if (!omap_mcbsp_check_valid_id(id)) {
+		printk(KERN_ERR "%s: Invalid id (%d)\n", __func__, id + 1);
+		return;
+	}
+
+	mcbsp = id_to_mcbsp_ptr(id);
+	*xbuffstat = OMAP_MCBSP_READ(mcbsp->io_base, XBUFFSTAT);
+	*rbuffstat = OMAP_MCBSP_READ(mcbsp->io_base, RBUFFSTAT);
+}

see, the above is not trusted. However, it's 100% trusted to read off
the timestamps recorded at DMA IRQ callback. (and at that time the buffer
has just been filled up.).


- Eero

Re: [RFC 3/4] OMAP3: McBSP: Add interface for transmit FIFO state query

[Peter Ujfalusi]

On Wednesday 03 March 2010 21:07:21 Nurkkala Eero.An (EXT-Offcode/Oulu) wrote:
> > what went wrong? (the pcm pointer w/dma pos never missed that
> > greatly)
> > Very unlikely that an IRQ just happened to come in between the
> > register reads..with that frequency (> 1/50)
> 
> Just to make sure:
> 
> +void omap_mcbsp_buffstat(unsigned int id, unsigned int *xbuffstat,
> +				unsigned int *rbuffstat)
> +{
> +	struct omap_mcbsp *mcbsp;
> +
> +	if (!(cpu_is_omap2430() || cpu_is_omap34xx()))
> +		return;
> +
> +	if (!omap_mcbsp_check_valid_id(id)) {
> +		printk(KERN_ERR "%s: Invalid id (%d)\n", __func__, id + 1);
> +		return;
> +	}
> +
> +	mcbsp = id_to_mcbsp_ptr(id);
> +	*xbuffstat = OMAP_MCBSP_READ(mcbsp->io_base, XBUFFSTAT);
> +	*rbuffstat = OMAP_MCBSP_READ(mcbsp->io_base, RBUFFSTAT);
> +}

Yes, and your sysfs read function was actually calling the omap_mcbsp_buffstat, 
and than it prints out both of the buffstat in one line.

> 
> see, the above is not trusted. However, it's 100% trusted to read off
> the timestamps recorded at DMA IRQ callback. (and at that time the buffer
> has just been filled up.).

Well, in element mode it would be kind of safe to report the FIFO size as delay 
in all cases.
But in threshold mode it is a bit different.
It all depends how the threshold value has been configured:
For example
if the threshold is 400, than at startup you will have three consequent bursts 
filling the buffer to 1200, and leaving 80 locations still free in the buffer. 
But as the playback progresses and we have 400 free locations, than the DMA will 
be filling the FIFO to close to full.

if the threshold is 1024, than you will have one burst at startup, the buffer 
will have 1024 location filled and 256 free. But as the playback progresses and 
we have 1024 free locations, than the DMA will be filling the FIFO to close to 
full.

So yes, over time you will get pretty close estimation about the delay.

But I still think, that my proposal also gives pretty good estimation about the 
delay as well.

> 
> 
> - Eero

-- 
Péter

Re: [RFC 3/4] OMAP3: McBSP: Add interface for transmit FIFO state query

[Peter Ujfalusi]

Hello,

On Wednesday 03 March 2010 21:00:58 Nurkkala Eero.An (EXT-Offcode/Oulu) wrote:
> From: Ujfalusi Peter
> 
> > So according to XBUFSTAT we have played out 289 samples.
> > based on the time we actually played 288.528 samples.
> > 
> > I would say this is really close to what we would expect to have?
> > 
> > Note: I have used printk for these, which pretty much alters the behavior
> > a bit in timing wise...
> > 
> > --
> > Péter
> 
> There was something like this, reading XBUFFSTAT and RBUFFSTAT
> (adjacently), and comparing the diff, it should be 145 +-1 in this case,
> but that's not true:
> 
> (usespace app reading the values through a sysfs node):
> 
> 1: tx: 247, rx: 101, (tx-rx):  146, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 146
> 2: tx: 377, rx: 232, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 3: tx: 136, rx: 471, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 4: tx:  40, rx: 375, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 5: tx:  63, rx: 398, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 6: tx: 444, rx: 299, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 7: tx: 330, rx: 185, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 8: tx: 198, rx:  53, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 9: tx: 453, rx: 308, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 10: tx: 459, rx: 313, (tx-rx):  146, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 146
> 11: tx: 353, rx: 208, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 12: tx: 435, rx: 290, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 13: tx: 421, rx: 276, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 14: tx: 397, rx: 251, (tx-rx):  146, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 146
> 15: tx: 297, rx: 151, (tx-rx):  146, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 146
> 16: tx: 341, rx: 196, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 17: tx: 347, rx: 202, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 18: tx: 298, rx: 153, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 19: tx: 341, rx: 196, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 20: tx: 121, rx: 456, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 21: tx: 109, rx: 444, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 22: tx: 465, rx: 320, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 23: tx: 300, rx: 155, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 24: tx: 217, rx:  72, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 25: tx: 361, rx: 216, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 26: tx: 443, rx: 298, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 27: tx: 325, rx: 180, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 28: tx: 398, rx: 252, (tx-rx):  146, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 146
> 29: tx: 346, rx: 201, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 30: tx: 474, rx: 329, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 31: tx: 323, rx: 178, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 32: tx: 349, rx: 204, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 33: tx: 202, rx:  57, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 34: tx: 462, rx: 317, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 35: tx:  87, rx: 422, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 36: tx: 407, rx: 262, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 37: tx: 354, rx: 209, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 38: tx: 377, rx: 232, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 39: tx: 435, rx: 290, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 40: tx: 456, rx: 311, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 41: tx: 466, rx: 321, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 42: tx: 349, rx: 204, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 43: tx: 328, rx: 183, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 44: tx: 385, rx: 240, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 45: tx: 115, rx: 450, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 46: tx: 297, rx: 152, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 47: tx: 332, rx: 187, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 48: tx: 298, rx: 153, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 49: tx: 432, rx: 286, (tx-rx):  146, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 146
> 50: tx:  99, rx: 434, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 51: tx:  96, rx: 431, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 52: tx: 380, rx: 235, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 53: tx: 417, rx: 272, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 54: tx: 272, rx: 337, (tx-rx):  -65, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 415 < NOK
> 55: tx: 391, rx: 246, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> 56: tx: 305, rx: 336, (tx-rx):  -31, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 449 < NOK
> 
> what went wrong? (the pcm pointer w/dma pos never missed that
> greatly)

I see your point.

> Very unlikely that an IRQ just happened to come in between the
> register reads..with that frequency (> 1/50)

I don't think that this has anything to do with IRQ, it looks to me more like an 
'accident' in the timing of the reading the buffstat registers.

> so subjectively XBUFFSTAT / RBUFFSTAT are not useful for
> any "real" use...

Well, yes and no. we can get good estimation with this I think still.

> 
> - Eero

How I see this:
In your code, you have a sysfs file, which can be read from user space.
User space semi randomly reading that file to get the buffstat values.
These registers are reflecting the buffer state on the L4 clock domain, which 
means that the actual value might differ.
So I think what happens is, that the user space happens to read the buffstat 
registers most of the time, when neither the TX or RX is buffer has burst DMA 
access, but time to time you can hit a point 'by accident' or just because of 
the state of the moon, when either of the TX or/and RX is actually under DMA 
burst. Since this burst is fast, L4 domain register can not be updated as 
frequently, so it will reflect a bit later state of the buffer. If this happens 
you will have inconsistent relation between TX and RX.

But I think, if you have similar sysfs file for comparing the DMA pointers you 
will also hit the same spot.
If you happened to read the pointers when one of the stream is in DMA burst, 
than you will definitely have the same problem.  
So the DMA pointer comparison is 'correct' when neither of the stream are in DMA 
burst.
Same goes for the buffstat registers: if neither of the streams are in burst 
they will provide pretty good numbers.

Since the pointer callback is naturally called after a period has been sent, the 
DMA is not in burst anymore, so the reading of buffstat on the given stream will 
give close enough estimation on the delay caused by the FIFO.

But yes, as you mentioned in your mail, this estimation can be done using 
timestamp in DMA completion handler, and than calculate the delay based on the 
timestamp we got, the threshold, and the size of the FIFO on the given McBSP 
port.


-- 
Péter

Re: [RFC 3/4] OMAP3: McBSP: Add interface for transmit FIFO state query

[Eero Nurkkala]

On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 09:09 +0100, Ujfalusi Peter (Nokia-D/Tampere)
wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Wednesday 03 March 2010 21:00:58 Nurkkala Eero.An (EXT-Offcode/Oulu) wrote:
> > From: Ujfalusi Peter
> > 
> > > So according to XBUFSTAT we have played out 289 samples.
> > > based on the time we actually played 288.528 samples.
> > > 
> > > I would say this is really close to what we would expect to have?
> > > 
> > > Note: I have used printk for these, which pretty much alters the behavior
> > > a bit in timing wise...
> > > 
> > > --
> > > Péter
> > 
> > There was something like this, reading XBUFFSTAT and RBUFFSTAT
> > (adjacently), and comparing the diff, it should be 145 +-1 in this case,
> > but that's not true:
> > 
> > (usespace app reading the values through a sysfs node):
> > 
> > 1: tx: 247, rx: 101, (tx-rx):  146, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 146
> > 2: tx: 377, rx: 232, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 3: tx: 136, rx: 471, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 4: tx:  40, rx: 375, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 5: tx:  63, rx: 398, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 6: tx: 444, rx: 299, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 7: tx: 330, rx: 185, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 8: tx: 198, rx:  53, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 9: tx: 453, rx: 308, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 10: tx: 459, rx: 313, (tx-rx):  146, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 146
> > 11: tx: 353, rx: 208, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 12: tx: 435, rx: 290, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 13: tx: 421, rx: 276, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 14: tx: 397, rx: 251, (tx-rx):  146, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 146
> > 15: tx: 297, rx: 151, (tx-rx):  146, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 146
> > 16: tx: 341, rx: 196, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 17: tx: 347, rx: 202, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 18: tx: 298, rx: 153, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 19: tx: 341, rx: 196, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 20: tx: 121, rx: 456, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 21: tx: 109, rx: 444, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 22: tx: 465, rx: 320, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 23: tx: 300, rx: 155, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 24: tx: 217, rx:  72, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 25: tx: 361, rx: 216, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 26: tx: 443, rx: 298, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 27: tx: 325, rx: 180, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 28: tx: 398, rx: 252, (tx-rx):  146, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 146
> > 29: tx: 346, rx: 201, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 30: tx: 474, rx: 329, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 31: tx: 323, rx: 178, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 32: tx: 349, rx: 204, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 33: tx: 202, rx:  57, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 34: tx: 462, rx: 317, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 35: tx:  87, rx: 422, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 36: tx: 407, rx: 262, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 37: tx: 354, rx: 209, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 38: tx: 377, rx: 232, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 39: tx: 435, rx: 290, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 40: tx: 456, rx: 311, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 41: tx: 466, rx: 321, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 42: tx: 349, rx: 204, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 43: tx: 328, rx: 183, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 44: tx: 385, rx: 240, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 45: tx: 115, rx: 450, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 46: tx: 297, rx: 152, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 47: tx: 332, rx: 187, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 48: tx: 298, rx: 153, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 49: tx: 432, rx: 286, (tx-rx):  146, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 146
> > 50: tx:  99, rx: 434, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 51: tx:  96, rx: 431, (tx-rx): -335, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 52: tx: 380, rx: 235, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 53: tx: 417, rx: 272, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 54: tx: 272, rx: 337, (tx-rx):  -65, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 415 < NOK
> > 55: tx: 391, rx: 246, (tx-rx):  145, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 145
> > 56: tx: 305, rx: 336, (tx-rx):  -31, (480+(tx-rx))%480: 449 < NOK
> > 
> > what went wrong? (the pcm pointer w/dma pos never missed that
> > greatly)
> 
> I see your point.
> 
> > Very unlikely that an IRQ just happened to come in between the
> > register reads..with that frequency (> 1/50)
> 
> I don't think that this has anything to do with IRQ, it looks to me more like an 
> 'accident' in the timing of the reading the buffstat registers.
> 
> > so subjectively XBUFFSTAT / RBUFFSTAT are not useful for
> > any "real" use...
> 
> Well, yes and no. we can get good estimation with this I think still.
> 
> > 
> > - Eero
> 
> How I see this:
> In your code, you have a sysfs file, which can be read from user space.
> User space semi randomly reading that file to get the buffstat values.
> These registers are reflecting the buffer state on the L4 clock domain, which 
> means that the actual value might differ.
> So I think what happens is, that the user space happens to read the buffstat 
> registers most of the time, when neither the TX or RX is buffer has burst DMA 
> access, but time to time you can hit a point 'by accident' or just because of 
> the state of the moon, when either of the TX or/and RX is actually under DMA 
> burst. Since this burst is fast, L4 domain register can not be updated as 
> frequently, so it will reflect a bit later state of the buffer. If this happens 
> you will have inconsistent relation between TX and RX.
> 
> But I think, if you have similar sysfs file for comparing the DMA pointers you 
> will also hit the same spot.

Don't recall so. Maybe the DMA pointer is not updated during a burst at
all.

> If you happened to read the pointers when one of the stream is in DMA burst, 
> than you will definitely have the same problem.  
> So the DMA pointer comparison is 'correct' when neither of the stream are in DMA 
> burst.
> Same goes for the buffstat registers: if neither of the streams are in burst 
> they will provide pretty good numbers.
> 

I guess that depends on the use case. "laissez-faire" style applications
could just swallow that - but applications requiring perfect numbers are
in deep trouble.

> Since the pointer callback is naturally called after a period has been sent, the 
> DMA is not in burst anymore, so the reading of buffstat on the given stream will 
> give close enough estimation on the delay caused by the FIFO.
> 

It's always called at that point, but the user may be interested of that
at any given time.

> But yes, as you mentioned in your mail, this estimation can be done using 
> timestamp in DMA completion handler, and than calculate the delay based on the 
> timestamp we got, the threshold, and the size of the FIFO on the given McBSP 
> port.
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@alsa-project.org
http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel

[RFC 4/4] ASoC: OMAP3: Report delay on playback caused by the internal FIFO

[Peter Ujfalusi]

Use the new delay calback function to report the delay through
ALSA for application caused by the internal FIFO.

Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@nokia.com>
---
 sound/soc/omap/omap-mcbsp.c |   26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sound/soc/omap/omap-mcbsp.c b/sound/soc/omap/omap-mcbsp.c
index d297256..72036b5 100644
--- a/sound/soc/omap/omap-mcbsp.c
+++ b/sound/soc/omap/omap-mcbsp.c
@@ -248,6 +248,31 @@ static int omap_mcbsp_dai_trigger(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream, int cmd,
 	return err;
 }
 
+static snd_pcm_sframes_t omap_mcbsp_dai_delay(
+			struct snd_pcm_substream *substream,
+			struct snd_soc_dai *dai)
+{
+	struct snd_soc_pcm_runtime *rtd = substream->private_data;
+	struct snd_soc_dai *cpu_dai = rtd->dai->cpu_dai;
+	struct omap_mcbsp_data *mcbsp_data = to_mcbsp(cpu_dai->private_data);
+	u16 fifo_use;
+	snd_pcm_sframes_t delay;
+
+	if (substream->stream == SNDRV_PCM_STREAM_PLAYBACK)
+		fifo_use = omap_mcbsp_get_tx_buffstat(mcbsp_data->bus_id);
+	else
+		return 0;
+
+	/*
+	 * Devide the used locations with the channel count to get the
+	 * FIFO usage in samples (don't care about partial samples in the
+	 * buffer).
+	 */
+	delay = fifo_use / substream->runtime->channels;
+
+	return delay;
+}
+
 static int omap_mcbsp_dai_hw_params(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream,
 				    struct snd_pcm_hw_params *params,
 				    struct snd_soc_dai *dai)
@@ -599,6 +624,7 @@ static struct snd_soc_dai_ops omap_mcbsp_dai_ops = {
 	.startup	= omap_mcbsp_dai_startup,
 	.shutdown	= omap_mcbsp_dai_shutdown,
 	.trigger	= omap_mcbsp_dai_trigger,
+	.delay		= omap_mcbsp_dai_delay,
 	.hw_params	= omap_mcbsp_dai_hw_params,
 	.set_fmt	= omap_mcbsp_dai_set_dai_fmt,
 	.set_clkdiv	= omap_mcbsp_dai_set_clkdiv,
-- 
1.7.0

Re: [RFC 4/4] ASoC: OMAP3: Report delay on playback caused by the internal FIFO

[Mark Brown]

On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 03:39:51PM +0200, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:

> +	if (substream->stream == SNDRV_PCM_STREAM_PLAYBACK)
> +		fifo_use = omap_mcbsp_get_tx_buffstat(mcbsp_data->bus_id);
> +	else
> +		return 0;

You're already handling the playback vs. capture thing here! :)

> +	/*
> +	 * Devide the used locations with the channel count to get the

Divide.

Re: [RFC 4/4] ASoC: OMAP3: Report delay on playback caused by the internal FIFO

[Peter Ujfalusi]

On Tuesday 02 March 2010 15:47:07 ext Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 03:39:51PM +0200, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> > +	if (substream->stream == SNDRV_PCM_STREAM_PLAYBACK)
> > +		fifo_use = omap_mcbsp_get_tx_buffstat(mcbsp_data->bus_id);
> > +	else
> > +		return 0;
> 
> You're already handling the playback vs. capture thing here! :)

Oh yes, I do. I have removed the capture (rx related) reporting, since as I 
mentioned, I was not sure how to, and what to report.
But is it OK to have initially support for playback delay handling, and if there 
is a need, add the capture later?

> 
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Devide the used locations with the channel count to get the
> 
> Divide.

Yes ;)

-- 
Péter

Re: [RFC 4/4] ASoC: OMAP3: Report delay on playback caused by the internal FIFO

[Mark Brown]

On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 03:52:36PM +0200, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 March 2010 15:47:07 ext Mark Brown wrote:

> > You're already handling the playback vs. capture thing here! :)

> Oh yes, I do. I have removed the capture (rx related) reporting, since as I 
> mentioned, I was not sure how to, and what to report.
> But is it OK to have initially support for playback delay handling, and if there 
> is a need, add the capture later?

The code is fine, this was more a comment on the earlier patch.

Re: [RFC 0/4] FIFO caused playback delay (latency) handling in soc

[Mark Brown]

On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 03:39:47PM +0200, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:

> There has been discussion in alsa-devel in this subject several times,
> but no actual patches has been sent.

Well, it's never really been discussed in an ASoC context - most of the
interest has been on the PC audio side.  This is the first interest in
it from the embedded side.

This is pretty much what I would have implemented, aside from the
playback/capture thing I mentioned the only other thing that I'd suggest
is also adding a callback for the platform driver.  Many CPUs actually
introduce the latency in the DMA stream rather than in the interface,
for example by filling up a SRAM buffer as DaVinci currently does, and
it's more natural for them to keep track of the latency introduced in
the code that's managing the DMA.  For devices where the buffer is on
the interface the DAI makes sense.

Re: [RFC 0/4] FIFO caused playback delay (latency) handling in soc

[Raymond Yau]

2010/3/2 Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@nokia.com>

> Hello,
>
> There has been discussion in alsa-devel in this subject several times,
> but no actual patches has been sent.
>
> Based on the available information the latency caused by the HW buffer
> on some systems can be handled by updating the runtime->delay.
>
> It has been discussed, that the runtime->delay can also be updated
> dynamically to show more accurate delay.
>
> To further complicate things, in ASoC we could have more buffer in the
> chain. To handle this we need soc level support.
>
> This RFC series tries to do that in soc by:
> - introducing a pcm_pointer wrapper
> - in this wrapper we call the original pcm_pointer functions to get the
>  DMA pointer
> - introducing a new interface in dai_ops to ask the delay from the dais
> - adding the cpu_dai and codec_dai returned delay to form the actual
>  delay
> - update the runtime->delay with this value.
>
> With this approach none of the existing drivers need change, but they
> can add support for specifying the FIFO caused delay.
>
> In this series on top of the core changes the omap(3) code is updated
> to take this delay reporting into use.
> I have not added the support to the tlv320dac33 codec driver, since it
> needs a bit more work, but along the same line it can be done, and if
> the tlv320dac33 is hooked to omap McBSP than applications can know the
> whole delay/latency on that path.
>
> Since this is for RFC, I have based it on sound-2.6 topc/asoc branch,
> which does not have the McBSP regcache nor the sidetone patches, but I
> would like to get feedback on this method first than create a proper
> series.
>
> I have left out linux-omap from this RFC round, since the problem
> is ALSA related.
>
> Thank you,
> Péter Ujfalusi
>
> ---
> Peter Ujfalusi (4):
>  ASoC: core: soc level wrapper for pcm_pointer callback
>  ASoC: core: Add delay operation to snd_soc_dai_ops
>  OMAP3: McBSP: Add interface for transmit FIFO state query
>  ASoC: OMAP3: Report delay on playback caused by the internal FIFO
>
>  arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/mcbsp.h |    4 +++
>  arch/arm/plat-omap/mcbsp.c              |   27 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  include/sound/soc-dai.h                 |    6 +++++
>  sound/soc/omap/omap-mcbsp.c             |   26 +++++++++++++++++++++++
>  sound/soc/soc-core.c                    |   34
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  5 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
>
>
Do soc support snd_pcm_rewind() and snd_pcm_forward ?

Re: [RFC 0/4] FIFO caused playback delay (latency) handling in soc

[Mark Brown]

On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 07:29:23AM +0800, Raymond Yau wrote:

> Do soc support snd_pcm_rewind() and snd_pcm_forward ?

No driver demand yet, though it'd be trivially implemented if anyone
wanted to do it.