From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Charles Keepax Subject: Re: ASoC: wm5110: Extend SYSCLK patch file for rev D Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 09:32:47 +0000 Message-ID: <20140306093247.GI8570@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1394070425.2861.35.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (opensource.wolfsonmicro.com [80.75.67.52]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FE132658DC for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 10:32:48 +0100 (CET) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1394070425.2861.35.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: Ben Hutchings Cc: Debian kernel maintainers , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, patches@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com, Mark Brown List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 01:47:05AM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote: > I'm looking at commit 34354792432b6e0a3b156819a1a19716c50d3473 and > include/linux/mfd/arizona/registers.h, and wondering what exactly this > the register patch is changing. > > It looks like there are some registers not named elsewhere (addresses > 0x0049, 0x004a, 0x0057, 0x0058). What about the higher addresses? Are > these more registers, or is this patching firmware in device memory? These are all internal registers that we don't usually expose, in the case of the Rev D some of these are not initialised to optimum values by the hardware the patch provides better audio performance and path transitions. Thanks, Charles