Fix audio for Lyrtech SFFSDR board

Fix audio for Lyrtech SFFSDR board

[Hugo Villeneuve]

These patches make the audio work again on the SFFSDR

[PATCH 1/4] ALSA: ASoC: Davinci: Fix SFFSDR FPGA module codec FS bug

[Hugo Villeneuve]

This prevented the FPGA from properly configuring the codec FS when
the SFFSDR FPGA was compiled as a module.

Signed-off-by: Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@hugovil.com>
---
 sound/soc/davinci/davinci-sffsdr.c |   14 +++++++-------
 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sound/soc/davinci/davinci-sffsdr.c b/sound/soc/davinci/davinci-sffsdr.c
index 74f1eb3..1d10957 100644
--- a/sound/soc/davinci/davinci-sffsdr.c
+++ b/sound/soc/davinci/davinci-sffsdr.c
@@ -25,10 +25,10 @@
 
 #include <asm/dma.h>
 #include <asm/mach-types.h>
-#ifdef CONFIG_SFFSDR_FPGA
-#include <asm/plat-sffsdr/sffsdr-fpga.h>
-#endif
 
+#if defined(CONFIG_SFFSDR_FPGA) || defined(CONFIG_SFFSDR_FPGA_MODULE)
+#include <mach/sffsdr-fpga.h>
+#endif
 #include <mach/asp.h>
 #include <mach/edma.h>
 
@@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ static int sffsdr_hw_params(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream,
 	/* Fsref can be 32000, 44100 or 48000. */
 	fs = params_rate(params);
 
-#ifndef CONFIG_SFFSDR_FPGA
+#if !defined(CONFIG_SFFSDR_FPGA) && !defined(CONFIG_SFFSDR_FPGA_MODULE)
 	/* Without the FPGA module, the Fs is fixed at 44100 Hz */
 	if (fs != 44100) {
 		pr_debug("warning: only 44.1 kHz is supported without SFFSDR FPGA module\n");
@@ -68,10 +68,10 @@ static int sffsdr_hw_params(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream,
 
 	pr_debug("sffsdr_hw_params: rate = %d Hz\n", fs);
 
-#ifndef CONFIG_SFFSDR_FPGA
-	return 0;
-#else
+#if defined(CONFIG_SFFSDR_FPGA) || defined(CONFIG_SFFSDR_FPGA_MODULE)
 	return sffsdr_fpga_set_codec_fs(fs);
+#else
+	return 0;
 #endif
 }
 
-- 
1.5.5

Re: [PATCH 1/4] ALSA: ASoC: Davinci: Fix SFFSDR FPGA module codec FS bug

[Mark Brown]

On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 11:32:06PM -0400, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
> This prevented the FPGA from properly configuring the codec FS when
> the SFFSDR FPGA was compiled as a module.

This doesn't apply against mainline either.  Please regenerate against
the topic/asoc branch of:

	git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tiwai/sound-2.6.git

[PATCH 2/4] ALSA: ASoC: Davinci: Replaced DAI format RIGHT_J by DSP_B for SFFSDR

[Hugo Villeneuve]

Signed-off-by: Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@hugovil.com>
---
 sound/soc/davinci/davinci-sffsdr.c |   17 ++++++++++-------
 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sound/soc/davinci/davinci-sffsdr.c b/sound/soc/davinci/davinci-sffsdr.c
index 1d10957..b338c71 100644
--- a/sound/soc/davinci/davinci-sffsdr.c
+++ b/sound/soc/davinci/davinci-sffsdr.c
@@ -36,6 +36,14 @@
 #include "davinci-pcm.h"
 #include "davinci-i2s.h"
 
+/*
+ * CLKX and CLKR are the inputs for the Sample Rate Generator.
+ * FSX and FSR are outputs, driven by the sample Rate Generator.
+ */
+#define AUDIO_FORMAT (SND_SOC_DAIFMT_DSP_B |	\
+		      SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBM_CFS |	\
+		      SND_SOC_DAIFMT_IB_NF)
+
 static int sffsdr_hw_params(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream,
 			    struct snd_pcm_hw_params *params,
 			    struct snd_soc_dai *dai)
@@ -56,13 +64,8 @@ static int sffsdr_hw_params(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream,
 	}
 #endif
 
-	/* Set cpu DAI configuration:
-	 * CLKX and CLKR are the inputs for the Sample Rate Generator.
-	 * FSX and FSR are outputs, driven by the sample Rate Generator. */
-	ret = snd_soc_dai_set_fmt(cpu_dai,
-				  SND_SOC_DAIFMT_RIGHT_J |
-				  SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CBM_CFS |
-				  SND_SOC_DAIFMT_IB_NF);
+	/* set cpu DAI configuration */
+	ret = snd_soc_dai_set_fmt(cpu_dai, AUDIO_FORMAT);
 	if (ret < 0)
 		return ret;
 
-- 
1.5.5

[PATCH 3/4] ALSA: ASoC: Davinci: Updated sffsdr_hw_params() function to new format

[Hugo Villeneuve]

Signed-off-by: Hugo Villeneuve <hugo-rg2e/+w5TaNBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>
---
 sound/soc/davinci/davinci-sffsdr.c |    3 +--
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sound/soc/davinci/davinci-sffsdr.c b/sound/soc/davinci/davinci-sffsdr.c
index b338c71..7fdfba8 100644
--- a/sound/soc/davinci/davinci-sffsdr.c
+++ b/sound/soc/davinci/davinci-sffsdr.c
@@ -45,8 +45,7 @@
 		      SND_SOC_DAIFMT_IB_NF)
 
 static int sffsdr_hw_params(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream,
-			    struct snd_pcm_hw_params *params,
-			    struct snd_soc_dai *dai)
+			    struct snd_pcm_hw_params *params)
 {
 	struct snd_soc_pcm_runtime *rtd = substream->private_data;
 	struct snd_soc_dai *cpu_dai = rtd->dai->cpu_dai;
-- 
1.5.5

[PATCH 4/4] ALSA: ASoC: Davinci: Fixed missing McBSP pinmux for SFFSDR

[Hugo Villeneuve]

Signed-off-by: Hugo Villeneuve <hugo-rg2e/+w5TaNBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>
---
 sound/soc/davinci/davinci-sffsdr.c |    3 +++
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sound/soc/davinci/davinci-sffsdr.c b/sound/soc/davinci/davinci-sffsdr.c
index 7fdfba8..1fc53c1 100644
--- a/sound/soc/davinci/davinci-sffsdr.c
+++ b/sound/soc/davinci/davinci-sffsdr.c
@@ -31,6 +31,7 @@
 #endif
 #include <mach/asp.h>
 #include <mach/edma.h>
+#include <mach/mux.h>
 
 #include "../codecs/pcm3008.h"
 #include "davinci-pcm.h"
@@ -135,6 +136,8 @@ static int __init sffsdr_init(void)
 	if (!machine_is_sffsdr())
 		return -EINVAL;
 
+	davinci_cfg_reg(DM644X_MCBSP);
+
 	sffsdr_snd_device = platform_device_alloc("soc-audio", 0);
 	if (!sffsdr_snd_device) {
 		printk(KERN_ERR "platform device allocation failed\n");
-- 
1.5.5

Re: [PATCH 4/4] ALSA: ASoC: Davinci: Fixed missing McBSP pinmux for SFFSDR

[Hugo Villeneuve]

On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 10:29:23 +0000
Mark Brown <broonie@sirena.org.uk> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 11:32:09PM -0400, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> >  
> > +	davinci_cfg_reg(DM644X_MCBSP);
> > +
> 
> I can't find any references to this function in mainline?

Hi Mark,
I based those patches on the latest linux-davinci git tree, which has
the function.

> Most of the
> ARM variants do this sort of configuration in the arch/arm code which
> was why I was looking for other users to see what was idiomatic for
> DaVinci.

In fact I just duplicated what was done for the evm board in
sound/soc/davinci/davinci-evm.c, which also has the davinci_cfg_reg()
function (in the linux-davinci tree):

  http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/khilman/linux-davinci.git;a=commit;h=da57d7068350741e62671a7f619d5b4fad2727c0

> I've applied the other three patches.

Thanks, Hugo V.

Re: [PATCH 4/4] ALSA: ASoC: Davinci: Fixed missing McBSP pinmux for SFFSDR

[Mark Brown]

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:03:41AM -0400, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:

> I based those patches on the latest linux-davinci git tree, which has
> the function.

Do not submit patches for mainline which are not based on mainline
trees.  Code which relies on out of tree changes needs to wait for those
out of tree changes to be merged before submitting to mainline.

Re: [PATCH 4/4] ALSA: ASoC: Davinci: Fixed missing McBSP pinmux for SFFSDR

[Hugo Villeneuve]

On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 15:16:32 +0000
Mark Brown <broonie@sirena.org.uk> wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:03:41AM -0400, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
> 
> > I based those patches on the latest linux-davinci git tree, which
> > has the function.
> 
> Do not submit patches for mainline which are not based on mainline
> trees.  Code which relies on out of tree changes needs to wait for
> those out of tree changes to be merged before submitting to mainline.

I did not know that these changes were not in mainline yet. I was told
that all davinci ASoC code changes were to be submitted only to ALSA,
and then were imported back into the davinci git tree. Apparently this
is not quite like that anymore.

Kevin, what is the new rule to submit davinci ASoC patches?

Hugo V.

Re: [PATCH 4/4] ALSA: ASoC: Davinci: Fixed missing McBSP pinmux for SFFSDR

[Kevin Hilman]

Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@hugovil.com> writes:

> On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 15:16:32 +0000
> Mark Brown <broonie@sirena.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:03:41AM -0400, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
>> 
>> > I based those patches on the latest linux-davinci git tree, which
>> > has the function.
>> 
>> Do not submit patches for mainline which are not based on mainline
>> trees.  Code which relies on out of tree changes needs to wait for
>> those out of tree changes to be merged before submitting to mainline.
>
> I did not know that these changes were not in mainline yet. I was told
> that all davinci ASoC code changes were to be submitted only to ALSA,
> and then were imported back into the davinci git tree. Apparently this
> is not quite like that anymore.
>
> Kevin, what is the new rule to submit davinci ASoC patches?
>

The DaVinci ASoC code is indeed in mainline, but not all of the
DaVinci core (in this case the pin mux) is yet in mainline.  I will be
pushing it during the next merge window.

On a related note, sound/soc/davinci/davinci-[evm,sffsdr].c is
actually board-level setup code and should not actually live in
sound/asoc/.  It should live in arch/arm/mach-davinci/* and follow the
rest of the davinci chip/board code upstream.

Kevin

Re: [PATCH 4/4] ALSA: ASoC: Davinci: Fixed missing McBSP pinmux for SFFSDR

[Mark Brown]

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 08:55:06AM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:

> On a related note, sound/soc/davinci/davinci-[evm,sffsdr].c is
> actually board-level setup code and should not actually live in
> sound/asoc/.  It should live in arch/arm/mach-davinci/* and follow the
> rest of the davinci chip/board code upstream.

No, the ASoC APIs are not stable enough for this - putting this code in
arch/arm will just lead to merge pain when code from one tree goes in
without updates from the other.

Experience also suggests that audio drivers often get substantial enough
and need sufficient review to warrant keeping separate from the core
machine code.

Re: [PATCH 4/4] ALSA: ASoC: Davinci: Fixed missing McBSP pinmux for SFFSDR

[Kevin Hilman]

Mark Brown <broonie@sirena.org.uk> writes:

> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 08:55:06AM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>
>> On a related note, sound/soc/davinci/davinci-[evm,sffsdr].c is
>> actually board-level setup code and should not actually live in
>> sound/asoc/.  It should live in arch/arm/mach-davinci/* and follow the
>> rest of the davinci chip/board code upstream.
>
> No, the ASoC APIs are not stable enough for this - putting this code in
> arch/arm will just lead to merge pain when code from one tree goes in
> without updates from the other.
>
> Experience also suggests that audio drivers often get substantial enough
> and need sufficient review to warrant keeping separate from the core
> machine code.

OK, good to know your opinion there.

Thanks,

Kevin

Re: [PATCH 4/4] ALSA: ASoC: Davinci: Fixed missing McBSP pinmux for SFFSDR

[Hugo Villeneuve]

On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 08:55:06 -0700
Kevin Hilman <khilman@deeprootsystems.com> wrote:

> Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@hugovil.com> writes:
> 
> > On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 15:16:32 +0000
> > Mark Brown <broonie@sirena.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:03:41AM -0400, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
> >> 
> >> > I based those patches on the latest linux-davinci git tree, which
> >> > has the function.
> >> 
> >> Do not submit patches for mainline which are not based on mainline
> >> trees.  Code which relies on out of tree changes needs to wait for
> >> those out of tree changes to be merged before submitting to
> >> mainline.
> >
> > I did not know that these changes were not in mainline yet. I was
> > told that all davinci ASoC code changes were to be submitted only
> > to ALSA, and then were imported back into the davinci git tree.
> > Apparently this is not quite like that anymore.
> >
> > Kevin, what is the new rule to submit davinci ASoC patches?
> >
> 
> The DaVinci ASoC code is indeed in mainline, but not all of the
> DaVinci core (in this case the pin mux) is yet in mainline.  I will be
> pushing it during the next merge window.

That doesn't really answer my question.

I can see that David Brownell pushed a patch to the davinci tree
directly modifying sound/soc/davinci/davinci-evm.c which IS in
mainline. Does this means that as of now all ASoC patches should be sent first to
the Davinci list, and then you will push those to the mainline kernel?

> On a related note, sound/soc/davinci/davinci-[evm,sffsdr].c is
> actually board-level setup code and should not actually live in
> sound/asoc/.  It should live in arch/arm/mach-davinci/* and follow the
> rest of the davinci chip/board code upstream.

Kevin, you have said the same things months ago and I agree with you.
When you or someone else move the evm stuff back into
arch/arm/mach-davinci, I will be more than happy to do the same for the
SFFSDR.

Hugo V.

Re: [PATCH 4/4] ALSA: ASoC: Davinci: Fixed missing McBSP pinmux for SFFSDR

[Kevin Hilman]

Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@hugovil.com> writes:

> On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 08:55:06 -0700
> Kevin Hilman <khilman@deeprootsystems.com> wrote:
>
>> Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@hugovil.com> writes:
>> 
>> > On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 15:16:32 +0000
>> > Mark Brown <broonie@sirena.org.uk> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:03:41AM -0400, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> > I based those patches on the latest linux-davinci git tree, which
>> >> > has the function.
>> >> 
>> >> Do not submit patches for mainline which are not based on mainline
>> >> trees.  Code which relies on out of tree changes needs to wait for
>> >> those out of tree changes to be merged before submitting to
>> >> mainline.
>> >
>> > I did not know that these changes were not in mainline yet. I was
>> > told that all davinci ASoC code changes were to be submitted only
>> > to ALSA, and then were imported back into the davinci git tree.
>> > Apparently this is not quite like that anymore.
>> >
>> > Kevin, what is the new rule to submit davinci ASoC patches?
>> >
>> 
>> The DaVinci ASoC code is indeed in mainline, but not all of the
>> DaVinci core (in this case the pin mux) is yet in mainline.  I will be
>> pushing it during the next merge window.
>
> That doesn't really answer my question.
>
> I can see that David Brownell pushed a patch to the davinci tree
> directly modifying sound/soc/davinci/davinci-evm.c which IS in
> mainline. Does this means that as of now all ASoC patches should be sent first to
> the Davinci list, and then you will push those to the mainline kernel?
>

No ASoc patches should be generated against an ASoC tree and submitted
to alsa-devel, and CC davinci list.

This means that the until the DaVinci core is in mainline, DaVinci git will have
slightly different looking ASoC drivers, but those changes will be minimal.

Kevin

Re: [PATCH 4/4] ALSA: ASoC: Davinci: Fixed missing McBSP pinmux for SFFSDR

[Hugo Villeneuve]

On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 09:20:15 -0700
Kevin Hilman <khilman@deeprootsystems.com> wrote:

> Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@hugovil.com> writes:
> 
> > On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 08:55:06 -0700
> > Kevin Hilman <khilman@deeprootsystems.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@hugovil.com> writes:
> >> 
> >> > On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 15:16:32 +0000
> >> > Mark Brown <broonie@sirena.org.uk> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:03:41AM -0400, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >> > I based those patches on the latest linux-davinci git tree,
> >> >> > which has the function.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Do not submit patches for mainline which are not based on
> >> >> mainline trees.  Code which relies on out of tree changes needs
> >> >> to wait for those out of tree changes to be merged before
> >> >> submitting to mainline.
> >> >
> >> > I did not know that these changes were not in mainline yet. I was
> >> > told that all davinci ASoC code changes were to be submitted only
> >> > to ALSA, and then were imported back into the davinci git tree.
> >> > Apparently this is not quite like that anymore.
> >> >
> >> > Kevin, what is the new rule to submit davinci ASoC patches?
> >> >
> >> 
> >> The DaVinci ASoC code is indeed in mainline, but not all of the
> >> DaVinci core (in this case the pin mux) is yet in mainline.  I
> >> will be pushing it during the next merge window.
> >
> > That doesn't really answer my question.
> >
> > I can see that David Brownell pushed a patch to the davinci tree
> > directly modifying sound/soc/davinci/davinci-evm.c which IS in
> > mainline. Does this means that as of now all ASoC patches should be
> > sent first to the Davinci list, and then you will push those to the
> > mainline kernel?
> >
> 
> No ASoc patches should be generated against an ASoC tree and submitted
> to alsa-devel, and CC davinci list.
> 
> This means that the until the DaVinci core is in mainline, DaVinci
> git will have slightly different looking ASoC drivers, but those
> changes will be minimal.

Ok, so the patch affecting sound/soc/davinci/davinci-evm.c SHOULD have
been submitted to ALSA first.

It is not easy following you guys. You say something and then do the
opposite.

Hugo V.

Re: [PATCH 4/4] ALSA: ASoC: Davinci: Fixed missing McBSP pinmux for SFFSDR

[Kevin Hilman]

Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@hugovil.com> writes:

> On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 09:20:15 -0700
> Kevin Hilman <khilman@deeprootsystems.com> wrote:
>
>> Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@hugovil.com> writes:
>> 
>> > On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 08:55:06 -0700
>> > Kevin Hilman <khilman@deeprootsystems.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@hugovil.com> writes:
>> >> 
>> >> > On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 15:16:32 +0000
>> >> > Mark Brown <broonie@sirena.org.uk> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:03:41AM -0400, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> > I based those patches on the latest linux-davinci git tree,
>> >> >> > which has the function.
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Do not submit patches for mainline which are not based on
>> >> >> mainline trees.  Code which relies on out of tree changes needs
>> >> >> to wait for those out of tree changes to be merged before
>> >> >> submitting to mainline.
>> >> >
>> >> > I did not know that these changes were not in mainline yet. I was
>> >> > told that all davinci ASoC code changes were to be submitted only
>> >> > to ALSA, and then were imported back into the davinci git tree.
>> >> > Apparently this is not quite like that anymore.
>> >> >
>> >> > Kevin, what is the new rule to submit davinci ASoC patches?
>> >> >
>> >> 
>> >> The DaVinci ASoC code is indeed in mainline, but not all of the
>> >> DaVinci core (in this case the pin mux) is yet in mainline.  I
>> >> will be pushing it during the next merge window.
>> >
>> > That doesn't really answer my question.
>> >
>> > I can see that David Brownell pushed a patch to the davinci tree
>> > directly modifying sound/soc/davinci/davinci-evm.c which IS in
>> > mainline. Does this means that as of now all ASoC patches should be
>> > sent first to the Davinci list, and then you will push those to the
>> > mainline kernel?
>> >
>> 
>> No ASoc patches should be generated against an ASoC tree and submitted
>> to alsa-devel, and CC davinci list.
>> 
>> This means that the until the DaVinci core is in mainline, DaVinci
>> git will have slightly different looking ASoC drivers, but those
>> changes will be minimal.
>
> Ok, so the patch affecting sound/soc/davinci/davinci-evm.c SHOULD have
> been submitted to ALSA first.

Yes, but it should've been a patch against an ASoC tree, not against
DaVinci git which may contain things not (yet) in the ASoC tree.

> It is not easy following you guys. You say something and then do the
> opposite.

Heh, sorry.

Do as I do, not as I say.  ;)

Kevin

Re: [PATCH 4/4] ALSA: ASoC: Davinci: Fixed missing McBSP pinmux for SFFSDR

[David Brownell]

On Tuesday 10 March 2009, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> >
> > Ok, so the patch affecting sound/soc/davinci/davinci-evm.c SHOULD have
> > been submitted to ALSA first.
> 
> Yes, but it should've been a patch against an ASoC tree, not against
> DaVinci git which may contain things not (yet) in the ASoC tree.
> 
> > It is not easy following you guys. You say something and then do the
> > opposite.
> 
> Heh, sorry.
> 
> Do as I do, not as I say.  ;)

I'd say "my bad" ... but in these cases there's seems to be no
better solution than having the DaVinci GIT tree diverge a bit
from mainline ASoC, in synchrony with arch/arm/mach-davinci
which is also diverging from mainline.

There's a general rule that patches should not break builds.
And that rule is why there are several ASoC patches I've not
yet sent to mainline.

The whole ASoC/DaVinci thing has been nothing but build
breakage however, since it depends on EDMA patches which
haven't yet gone to mainline.  (But, I believe, will soon
do so, at which point that breakage will stop.)

- Dave

Re: [PATCH 4/4] ALSA: ASoC: Davinci: Fixed missing McBSP pinmux for SFFSDR

[Mark Brown]

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 01:07:34PM -0400, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:

> It is not easy following you guys. You say something and then do the
> opposite.

There's a very simple rule which works for all upstream submissions:
always generate patches against the tree which the patches are being
submitted to.  If there are changes that have cross-tree dependencies
then those need to be resolved on a case by case basis - normally the
best thing to there is for the affected patches to take the same path
as whatever they depend on.

It is normal and expected for the different trees people merge on to
diverge during a release cycle: for example, changes to a subsystem may
well affect large portions of that subsystem while architecture changes
may affect a wide range of drivers.