Re: [PATCH 10/19] ASoC: Intel: add mrfld DSP registers

[Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com>]

On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 10:22:30AM +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 06/13/2014 02:33 PM, Vinod Koul wrote:
> >+unsigned int sst_soc_read(struct snd_soc_platform *platform,
> >+			unsigned int reg)
> >+{
> >+	struct sst_data *drv = snd_soc_platform_get_drvdata(platform);
> >+
> >+	pr_debug("%s: reg[%d] = %#x\n", __func__, reg, drv->widget[reg]);
> >+	BUG_ON(reg > (SST_NUM_WIDGETS - 1));
> >+	return drv->widget[reg];
> >+}
> >+
> >+int sst_soc_write(struct snd_soc_platform *platform,
> >+		  unsigned int reg, unsigned int val)
> >+{
> >+	struct sst_data *drv = snd_soc_platform_get_drvdata(platform);
> >+
> >+	pr_debug("%s: reg[%d] = %#x\n", __func__, reg, val);
> >+	BUG_ON(reg > (SST_NUM_WIDGETS - 1));
> >+	drv->widget[reg] = val;
> >+	return 0;
> >+}
> 
> These seem to be purely virtual registers, what is this about? The
> DAPM core is able to handle widgets and controls without any
> register backing just fine. There is no need to emulate virtual
> registers.
But we need to store the mixer configuration for sending IPCs to DSP. So virtual
register file is very much required

> >+
> >+unsigned int sst_reg_read(struct sst_data *drv, unsigned int reg,
> >+			  unsigned int shift, unsigned int max)
> >+{
> [...]
> >+}
> >+
> >+unsigned int sst_reg_write(struct sst_data *drv, unsigned int reg,
> >+			   unsigned int shift, unsigned int max, unsigned int val)
> >+{
> [..]
> >+}
> 
> How are these functions different from snd_soc_platform_{read,update_bits}()?
Should be possible, I will check!

-- 
~Vinod