From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH v2] ASoC: simple-card: overwrite cpu_dai->fmt with codec_dai->fmt Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 21:20:55 +0000 Message-ID: <20140313212055.GN366@sirena.org.uk> References: <1394593331-22867-1-git-send-email-Guangyu.Chen@freescale.com> <5320280C.6080004@ti.com> <20140312093353.GH1177@MrMyself> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="c6397Mob2532IpCX" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140312093353.GH1177@MrMyself> Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Nicolin Chen Cc: Jyri Sarha , mark.rutland@arm.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com, pawel.moll@arm.com, ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk, Li.Xiubo@freescale.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, lgirdwood@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, rob@landley.net, galak@codeaurora.org, moinejf@free.fr List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org --c6397Mob2532IpCX Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 05:33:54PM +0800, Nicolin Chen wrote: > I'm not sure if there's any defect from this idea, but as long as we > keep DAIFMT settings identical for both dai-link ends, it'll be a > neater way. > So I'd like to pend this patch and wait for further solution from that > topic. My understanding of the binding had been that exactly one of the devices on the link would have each master flag set and the code was parsing both devices together in order to come up with the setting. Obviously I didn't check the code closely enough here. It seems that the Renesas devices actually do this, though just due to a bug in the master/slave handling. The patch you posted would essentially implement that (without validating the settings on the CPU side, but that could be added). The above suggestion would also work though it *is* a change in the binding and right now we don't have code for it. We need something here very soon, the merge window is going to open shortly and we ought to avoid having the problematic code in v3.15 if we can - indeed I'd really prefer to get something into v3.14 if possible (though this patch doesn't apply cleanly there and it's *very* late). Thoughts? --c6397Mob2532IpCX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJTIiE0AAoJELSic+t+oim9MTwP/iIqldFiWtJrJf0jh4W9uJ3A gl3AVyXfFJ2K9IL/vaOdISreKa8DBqDrXbKTyofGL6WSC79jvKdgVQpOvTH+2fYm M6wXR/Z6KZCujdPPbe92W3mbfhvVbJ31tOX/asDn5KkBKxwaYUml0Pxqno1NG7fi UuO5biq4t9v7ofdkK99CareN11Lvgn+IFqsafRnT222YJx6bFzCgYgQaftbjxa/9 NxQvFKYK/SH+PUifH9nnqYKEwZzWmHjPFTNfEE6SuQ5gZ11ZK5/sAeRblgr079YH j/8uOuizME3cuwo21qqrRWz72gBOVp5X/pBPFzoalz+Fu5jWtg4xBfwvauileSHJ Lgzr+9RlY4JgtAa+7HnHV9QteVCceYbEefe/hEl+AhKiayLUge66+TiUJLhueno6 Xtiz/syOYirPkBbIRmiJmWLZ0wTb9YMlCh4Wq1lr+KZ+huY/uyrjupRC9DotRPVZ YI3DCSxa1H+XhtDTPftcW2Wqg4hrbfoCVQ14Er2Hg/awLsxQ2afdRA8LAMDCN0gX C3oItFUSvrnTjnp7W8t7XCuIrvD1cmDGKK71IKdJVMY+R+j4xQgNnUXY/L++gHgZ mnqBOe9M3TMRHBrIAnJrEwDgUOfkdybkxuiiSXB8wu0CNfG4IcRiOi4XZNrZgVjh EK1ytWVQR3v7tlUYmU+p =ZYFF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --c6397Mob2532IpCX--