From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id 197CDE0092D; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 11:49:51 -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 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no * trust * [193.201.172.119 listed in list.dnswl.org] * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider * (picmaster[at]mail.bg) * -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 CC884E0090E for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 11:49:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.0.123] (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 08F1C20270C6; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 21:49:39 +0200 (EET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=mail.bg; s=default; t=1421956180; bh=Q1dpCcvLuUjdXC7EoDl6Df7M2gpC/e+/oiyzQxpCB8k=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=u2v5Bn+NLwI9w80PoIwK/sVVVfwuNE5ZolE4yI2TrwO/4WOwj20S4anqjnRI4ua9x 1iwxp05Aof9fmw+U3Zb74dXVSk6yyEfQsJdqfWnYuaT54a+NHbYyASLjLCUBxHiJKx NtHEw3y3Mt/R2F0vhTWgU8s5HKbKi6quxOdxC7HE= Message-ID: <54C15453.8050100@mail.bg> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 21:49:39 +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> <54C03C72.3050502@mail.bg> <54C0F9FE.6020208@mlbassoc.com> <54C14241.4090805@mail.bg> <54C1430A.6050303@mlbassoc.com> <54C149E5.6040303@boundarydevices.com> <54C14D7A.6070206@mail.bg> In-Reply-To: Cc: "meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org" , Gary Thomas 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: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 19:49:51 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Fabio, On 01/22/2015 09:33 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote: > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Nikolay Dimitrov wrote: > >> As we discussed with Fabio, when you define SGTL5000_SMALL_POP as 0, the >> following call... >> >> snd_soc_update_bits(codec, SGTL5000_CHIP_REF_CTRL, SGTL5000_SMALL_POP, 1); >> >> ...doesn't actually write to the I2C register, and leaves the default >> behavior, which is SMALL_POP = 1. And as Fabio noted, the audible behavior >> of this SMALL_POP bit is inverted as compared to the documentation, so >> SMALL_POP 0 should have the click audible, and SMALL_POP 1 should make it >> inaudible. >> >> For me personally the patch is misleading written this way - it looks like >> it's writing to the register, but neither this write is actually happening >> (you can sniff the I2C bus if you wish), and also this patch hides the issue >> with improperly documented SMALL_POP bit. > > There was no intention to hide anything in that patch. Sorry, I didn't mean that at all. > This is off-topic here on a Yocto list though, so I suggest we move > such discussion to the alsa-devel list which is the appropriate place. OK, understood. Regards, Nikolay