Alsa-Devel Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>
To: Cezary Rojewski <cezary.rojewski@intel.com>, alsa-devel@alsa-project.org
Cc: broonie@kernel.org, tiwai@suse.com, lgirdwood@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] ASoC: Intel: Haswell: Adjust machine device private context
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:44:30 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <90925296-5cb4-fa87-9c35-a7008f5e8df5@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <99f93211-acfe-cd29-09f9-900dbd848bd3@intel.com>



On 8/22/19 12:14 PM, Cezary Rojewski wrote:
> On 2019-08-22 18:42, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 8/22/19 11:05 AM, Cezary Rojewski wrote:
>>> On 2019-08-22 17:58, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 8/22/19 6:36 AM, Cezary Rojewski wrote:
>>>>> Apart from Haswell machines, all other devices have their private data
>>>>> set to snd_soc_acpi_mach instance.
>>>>>
>>>>> Changes for HSW/ BDW boards introduced with series:
>>>>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/10782035/
>>>>>
>>>>> added support for dai_link platform_name adjustments within card probe
>>>>> routines. These take for granted private_data points to
>>>>> snd_soc_acpi_mach whereas for Haswell, it's sst_pdata instead. Change
>>>>> private context of platform_device - representing machine board - to
>>>>> address this.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fixes: e87055d732e3 ("ASoC: Intel: haswell: platform name fixup 
>>>>> support")
>>>>> Fixes: 7e40ddcf974a ("ASoC: Intel: bdw-rt5677: platform name fixup 
>>>>> support")
>>>>> Fixes: 2d067b2807f9 ("ASoC: Intel: broadwell: platform name fixup 
>>>>> support")
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Cezary Rojewski <cezary.rojewski@intel.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>   sound/soc/intel/common/sst-acpi.c | 3 ++-
>>>>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/sound/soc/intel/common/sst-acpi.c 
>>>>> b/sound/soc/intel/common/sst-acpi.c
>>>>> index 15f2b27e643f..c34f628c7987 100644
>>>>> --- a/sound/soc/intel/common/sst-acpi.c
>>>>> +++ b/sound/soc/intel/common/sst-acpi.c
>>>>> @@ -109,11 +109,12 @@ int sst_acpi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>>>       }
>>>>>       platform_set_drvdata(pdev, sst_acpi);
>>>>> +    mach->pdata = sst_pdata;
>>>>>       /* register machine driver */
>>>>>       sst_acpi->pdev_mach =
>>>>>           platform_device_register_data(dev, mach->drv_name, -1,
>>>>> -                          sst_pdata, sizeof(*sst_pdata));
>>>>> +                          mach, sizeof(*mach));
>>>>
>>>> I now agree that the code I added is incorrect and probably accesses 
>>>> memory offsets that aren't right. I have absolutely no idea why I 
>>>> added this comment that 'legacy does not pass parameters' when it 
>>>> most definitively does. Good catch on your side.
>>>>
>>>> That said, doesn't the proposed fix introduce another issue?
>>>>
>>>> In the machine drivers, you still get pdata directly, so aren't you 
>>>> missing an indirection to get back to pdata from mach?
>>>>
>>>> static int bdw_rt5677_rtd_init(struct snd_soc_pcm_runtime *rtd)
>>>> {
>>>>      struct snd_soc_component *component = 
>>>> snd_soc_rtdcom_lookup(rtd, DRV_NAME);
>>>>      struct sst_pdata *pdata = dev_get_platdata(component->dev);
>>>>      struct sst_hsw *broadwell = pdata->dsp;
>>>>
>>>> <<< so here you took the wrong pointer, no?
>>>
>>> Both Baytrail and Haswell are enumerated in a bit different fashion 
>>> than SKL equivalents.
>>>
>>> There is an in-place registration for machine device - whose 
>>> private_data gets used in machine probe - and pcm device which 
>>> happens on firmware load callback 
>>> (/sound/soc/intel/common/sst-acpi:63). _rtd_init makes use of the 
>>> latter of two.
>>
>> I don't get your explanations. can you elaborate on what this does now 
>> that pdata is no longer passed as an argument to the machine driver:
>>
>> struct snd_soc_component *component = snd_soc_rtdcom_lookup(rtd, 
>> DRV_NAME);
>> struct sst_pdata *pdata = dev_get_platdata(component->dev);
>>
>> the 'component' here is not the PCM one, is it?
>>
>>
> 
> Sure thing.
> 
> Code:
>      /* register machine driver */
>      sst_acpi->pdev_mach =
>          platform_device_register_data(dev, mach->drv_name, -1,
>                            sst_pdata, sizeof(*sst_pdata));
> 
> Found in sst_acpi_probe (/sound/soc/intel/common/sst-acpi.c:145) 
> generates new platform_device - which represents machine board - with 
> its private data set to pointer to instance of struct sst_pdata type. 
> This data gets used on machine board probe, e.g.: broadwell_audio_probe 
> (/sound/soc/intel/boards/broadwell.c:270).
> Involved platform is called: broadwell-audio. Requested private data 
> type by broadwell_audio_probe: struct snd_soc_acpi_mach *. MISMATCH.
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
>      /* register PCM and DAI driver */
>      sst_acpi->pdev_pcm =
>          platform_device_register_data(dev, desc->drv_name, -1,
>                            sst_pdata, sizeof(*sst_pdata));
> 
> Found in sst_acpi_fw_cb (/sound/soc/intel/common/sst_acpi_fw_cb:47) 
> generates new platform_device - which represents Haswell PCM, you may 
> treat it as Skylake equivalent - with its private data set to pointer to 
> instance of struct sst_pdata type. This data gets used on dai .init - 
> broadwell_rtd_init - invocation when card is instantiated by ASoC code. 
> As you can see on (/sound/soc/intel/boards/broadwell.c:162), platform 
> tied with it is: haswell-pcm-audio. Requested private data type by 
> broadwell_rtd_init - struct sst_pdata *. MATCH.


the machine drivers uses snd_soc_rtdcom_lookup(rtd, DRV_NAME);

How is DRV_NAME connected to haswell-pcm-audio?

I must be missing something in your logic.

_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@alsa-project.org
https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel

  reply	other threads:[~2019-08-22 18:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-22 11:36 [PATCH 0/4] ASoC: Intel: Haswell: Adjust machine device private Cezary Rojewski
2019-08-22 11:36 ` [PATCH 1/4] ASoC: Intel: Haswell: Adjust machine device private context Cezary Rojewski
2019-08-22 14:07   ` Pierre-Louis Bossart
2019-08-22 15:11     ` Cezary Rojewski
2019-08-22 15:58   ` Pierre-Louis Bossart
2019-08-22 16:05     ` Cezary Rojewski
2019-08-22 16:42       ` Pierre-Louis Bossart
2019-08-22 17:14         ` Cezary Rojewski
2019-08-22 18:44           ` Pierre-Louis Bossart [this message]
2019-08-22 19:02             ` Cezary Rojewski
2019-08-22 20:44               ` Pierre-Louis Bossart
2019-08-23  7:27                 ` Cezary Rojewski
2019-08-28  9:38                   ` Cezary Rojewski
2019-08-29 22:31                     ` Pierre-Louis Bossart
2019-08-30 11:45   ` Applied "ASoC: Intel: Haswell: Adjust machine device private context" to the asoc tree Mark Brown
2019-08-30 11:45     ` [alsa-devel] " Mark Brown
2019-08-22 11:36 ` [PATCH 2/4] ASoC: Intel: haswell: Simplify device probe Cezary Rojewski
2019-08-30 11:45   ` Applied "ASoC: Intel: haswell: Simplify device probe" to the asoc tree Mark Brown
2019-08-30 11:45     ` [alsa-devel] " Mark Brown
2019-08-22 11:36 ` [PATCH 3/4] ASoC: Intel: bdw-rt5677: Simplify device probe Cezary Rojewski
2019-08-30 11:45   ` Applied "ASoC: Intel: bdw-rt5677: Simplify device probe" to the asoc tree Mark Brown
2019-08-30 11:45     ` [alsa-devel] " Mark Brown
2019-08-22 11:36 ` [PATCH 4/4] ASoC: Intel: broadwell: Simplify device probe Cezary Rojewski
2019-08-30 11:45   ` Applied "ASoC: Intel: broadwell: Simplify device probe" to the asoc tree Mark Brown
2019-08-30 11:45     ` [alsa-devel] " Mark Brown
2019-08-29 22:45 ` [PATCH 0/4] ASoC: Intel: Haswell: Adjust machine device private 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=90925296-5cb4-fa87-9c35-a7008f5e8df5@linux.intel.com \
    --to=pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=alsa-devel@alsa-project.org \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=cezary.rojewski@intel.com \
    --cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
    --cc=tiwai@suse.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