From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from alsa0.perex.cz (alsa0.perex.cz [77.48.224.243]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E763C433EF for ; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 16:33:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (alsa1.perex.cz [207.180.221.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F930192D; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 17:32:49 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa0.perex.cz 8F930192D DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=alsa-project.org; s=default; t=1638203619; bh=q5aBe0Jvp1sWsQ8PvUlZgsZZjnzwEdxUlLIAp54EnPE=; h=From:Subject:To:References:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From; b=ELgxGT+6vHDV0PULAOSoyK/9ZRnQGEqekRMQpGtJzJ5+l9BQQXPUtyTv2L3ln8tXD 4Yg8b0jrs1HdaeI2iOV/UcTe2MIQmWcKDxTk45F0bW+aJesh/K/65xfUlDL1vOpmQA PYJCr8jZeDTBF+rvpoEsXRDXaSoZqaOLtCx7ERBQ= Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3078F800EE; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 17:32:48 +0100 (CET) Received: by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix, from userid 50401) id E40E0F800EE; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 17:32:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from mga05.intel.com (mga05.intel.com [192.55.52.43]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 92AAAF800EE for ; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 17:32:38 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa1.perex.cz 92AAAF800EE X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,10183"; a="322241095" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.87,273,1631602800"; d="scan'208";a="322241095" Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by fmsmga105.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Nov 2021 08:32:05 -0800 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.87,273,1631602800"; d="scan'208";a="676418419" Received: from ticela-nm-11.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.212.98.225]) ([10.212.98.225]) by orsmga005-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Nov 2021 08:32:03 -0800 From: Pierre-Louis Bossart Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] ASoC: soc-dai: update snd_soc_dai_delay() to snd_soc_pcm_dai_delay() To: Mark Brown , Kuninori Morimoto References: <877dd8y26l.wl-kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> <875yssy25z.wl-kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> <2cc78158-e288-e949-594f-0ab939a35942@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: <2cd48411-4be6-196f-025d-74fd3a5266dc@linux.intel.com> Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2021 09:42:34 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/78.0 Thunderbird/78.14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Cezary Rojewski , Linux-ALSA , Jie Yang , Liam Girdwood , Takashi Iwai , Hans de Goede , Gu Shengxian X-BeenThere: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Alsa-devel mailing list for ALSA developers - http://www.alsa-project.org" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: "Alsa-devel" On 11/26/21 8:09 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 11:41:38PM +0000, Kuninori Morimoto wrote: > >> Sorry for my late response. >> (It was PC replace week) > > No worries, hope the new PC is working well! > >>>> I would think it's more accurate to update the delay information while >>>> dealing with the hw_ptr update, no? > >>> Morimoto-san? > >> I think your opinion is very correct. >> But this patch-set is for "cleanup/refactoring", >> and your opinion is for "add new feature", I think. > > Hrm, right - this isn't making anything better or worse in terms of the > accuracy, it's just moving things around so Pierre's suggestion is a > separate thing. Indeed, I misunderstood the series are removing the update of the runtime->delay field while updating the hw_ptr, but this is only shuffling code around. This is still updating both avail/delay in the same manner so no objections. Sorry for the noise.