From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Jack Yu <jack.yu@realtek.com>,
alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, tiwai@suse.de,
Bard liao <yung-chuan.liao@linux.intel.com>,
Rander Wang <rander.wang@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: rt715: Add module parameter to fix dmic pop sound issue.
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:06:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200917130638.GE4755@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9cbc7629-f28e-461c-1787-da5280269f99@linux.intel.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 970 bytes --]
On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 08:00:39AM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> On 9/17/20 6:25 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Normally we would just add a delay in the driver unconditionally, why
> > make this a module paramter? If there are board variations then we
> > should be getting them from board data, not forcing individual users to
> > bodge things with a module parameter.
> that wasn't the intent. 400ms is the recommended value, but the parameter
> provides a way to experiment without having to recompile during
> integration/debug stages.
> It was my recommendation to add this parameter, I don't mind removing it if
> you prefer it that way. Or I can respin the commit message and comments to
> make it clearer what the intended use was.
It'd be better to just remove it. If you want a facility to experiment
for testing debugfs is a better fit I think, unless this is a delay that
only gets done once during probe of course in which case that wouldn't
work.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-17 13:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-16 20:47 [PATCH] ASoC: rt715: Add module parameter to fix dmic pop sound issue Pierre-Louis Bossart
2020-09-17 11:25 ` Mark Brown
2020-09-17 13:00 ` Pierre-Louis Bossart
2020-09-17 13:06 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2020-09-17 13:24 ` Pierre-Louis Bossart
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200917130638.GE4755@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=alsa-devel@alsa-project.org \
--cc=jack.yu@realtek.com \
--cc=pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com \
--cc=rander.wang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=tiwai@suse.de \
--cc=yung-chuan.liao@linux.intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox