From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id 8B466E007CD; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 12:28:46 -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 B750DE005B4 for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 12:28:35 -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 B80B0202C5E8; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 22:28:33 +0200 (EET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=mail.bg; s=default; t=1421958513; bh=B0HMc9it3LosksmjQYBroOqJt+R4q2F1y7skV0th9xU=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=9ikNboJYDTkPwpDMcMsbO+VxUbmsb3QZ34ADpiNS4TQ8RZgvbM3m9R18xyPXLVZ/I MMxLFPa3pTm37SCGreS/HoPywmgMV6b8XyOU988D1JTxC3lbp61Yal8o2vHGeJr+DS qRzbDQzRReGPk0h05JLoFloQyzPQyZdLf0EbgZMM= Message-ID: <54C15D71.1080607@mail.bg> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 22:28:33 +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: Gary Thomas , meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org 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> <54C14DCD.1060809@mlbassoc.com> <54C15387.4020806@mlbassoc.com> <54C15A94.6050102@mlbassoc.com> In-Reply-To: <54C15A94.6050102@mlbassoc.com> 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 20:28:46 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Gary, On 01/22/2015 10:16 PM, Gary Thomas wrote: > On 2015-01-22 12:49, Fabio Estevam wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Gary Thomas wrote: >> >>> Nevermind - I rebuilt my image today and the sound is back. >>> >>> That said, it brings up an interesting issue. I'm running the >>> same kernel on two i.MX6 boards - the SabreLite and one of my >>> company's internal design which is _almost_ identical. The SGTL5000 >>> setup is identical. My SabreLite does not have a pop, but my other >>> board does. I wonder what could be the difference? They do have >>> slightly different i.MX6 silicon (not sure about the SGTL5000). >>> SabreLite = i.MX6Q rev 1.0, My board = i.MX6Q rev 1.2 >> >> Do you get the pop on your board if you use the workaround patch that >> Nikolay is using? >> > > I haven't seen it - was it sent to this list? Yep, check my message sent on 21.Jan, 02:34AM to this same thread. Regards, Nikolay