From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id E57E2E008A7; Wed, 21 Jan 2015 15:55:39 -0800 (PST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on yocto-www.yoctoproject.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-HAM-Report: * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider * (picmaster[at]mail.bg) * -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no * trust * [193.201.172.119 listed in list.dnswl.org] * -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's * domain * 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily * valid * -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature Received: from mx3.mail.bg (mx3.mail.bg [193.201.172.119]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A507E0084E for ; Wed, 21 Jan 2015 15:55:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.0.40] (unknown [93.152.143.60]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx3.mail.bg (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0C94E2027A5B; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 01:55:30 +0200 (EET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=mail.bg; s=default; t=1421884531; bh=gpNvuBE++CnO5yFk8ORoDX11jDyDIcsP/8Sf+qh79qs=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=tx0uFpjh9BiMfIAnSlkZ24vLFFp/qweI5yAKH2wg1kCDrNbkN6naGsGBc98huE2TO 4IkWKFQjbTTb8lfBHRFtXpA6p4YMb4YiWuIS84mU5uuAlEwSgtylyjqXo/la3lEcLH b/ObmCC5fNLCJ6KHam+umHx2QwdK4Be74Q4hh8xM= Message-ID: <54C03C72.3050502@mail.bg> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 01:55:30 +0200 From: Nikolay Dimitrov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fabio Estevam References: <54BED2E8.70901@mail.bg> <54BEF411.9080503@mail.bg> <54BF0F40.6030407@mail.bg> In-Reply-To: Cc: "meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org" Subject: Re: Audio glitch with SGTL5000 X-BeenThere: meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Usage and development list for the meta-fsl-* layers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 23:55:40 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Fabio, On 01/21/2015 04:59 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote: > On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 12:56 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote: > >> Yes, you are right. It seems I cleared the bit instead of setting it. >> I will retest on my boards. > > This is interesting: just tested on a imx53-qsb and with my patch > applied, which clears SMALL_POP I don't hear the loud click after the > playback. With SMALL_POP set I do hear the click. Hehe, I'm not sure that you cleared the bit actually :). I think that with mask 0 you're not writing to the I2C reg at all - you can check the return value of snd_soc_update_bits(), should be 0 (no error, no value changed). But would be great if you can also monitor the I2C bus traffic to confirm whether you really write or not to this register. Can you try to change only the last argument and hear whether it makes a difference, like this: snd_soc_update_bits(codec, SGTL5000_CHIP_REF_CTRL, 1, 1); snd_soc_update_bits(codec, SGTL5000_CHIP_REF_CTRL, 1, 0); Regards, Nikolay PS: Really sorry for the delayed response, but my inet connectivity was limited for a while.