From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Henningsson Subject: command 0x7e7 sent on STAC9200 / STAC9228 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 14:03:39 +0200 Message-ID: <502CE19B.9030000@canonical.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from youngberry.canonical.com (youngberry.canonical.com [91.189.89.112]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A20A265FDA for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 13:33:53 +0200 (CEST) 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: Takashi Iwai , "alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org Hi Takashi, While working with fixing the stuff that my automated test tool has discovered, here's one I'm not sure what to do with. If you run hda-emu on any of these three: codecs/canonical/stac9200-dell-inspiron-6400-ccert-200705-83 codecs/canonical/stac9200-dell-inspiron-6400-ccert-200712-207 codecs/canonical/stac9228-dell-inspiron-1420-ccert-200708-95 Hda-emu prints out: invalid command: NID=0x1, verb=0x7e7, parm=0x0 In this case, I'm not sure if the command is invalid (and thus should be removed), or if it's a secret IDT verb that we need to set. From patch_sigmatel.c: /* Configure GPIOx as CMOS */ snd_hda_codec_write(codec, codec->afg, 0, 0x7e7, 0); But in hda-spec.c this verb is only in the verb table of IDT codecs, not STAC codecs. Can you offer some enlightement? -- David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd. https://launchpad.net/~diwic