From: koro.chen@mediatek.com (Koro Chen)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [alsa-devel] [RFC PATCH] ASoC: Modify check condition of multiple bindings of components
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 10:31:53 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1444962713.31246.6.camel@mtksdaap41> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <561FA979.6030407@metafoo.de>
On Thu, 2015-10-15 at 15:26 +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 10/15/2015 02:10 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:00:01AM +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> >
> >> It was never intended that it is possible to bind a component to multiple
> >> cards. That it was possible was a bug that was overlooked and some people
> >> tried to do it which caused apparently random crashes later on, caused by
> >> the data structure corruption. This is why we added the check to catch this
> >> kind of mistake early and to avoid the crashes.
> >
> > This is true, but I do think it's something that we should have some
> > story on supporting for some of this hardware that has a bunch of
> > channels in one IP block that can't really interact with each other.
> > It's going to make it a lot easier for people to think about the
> > hardware and how to describe it.
>
> I'm not saying we shouldn't support it, just that we can't support it with
> the current code. And adding support for it will require a fair bit of
> restructuring.
>
> If a hardware block as multiple independent channels the best approach in my
> opinion is to register multiple components (Which we can't do at the moment,
> because there can only be one component per device). From a framework point
Yes... I have tried to register 2 platforms in my ASoC platform driver
but alsa considered they are the same platform since they are from the
same device.
> of view there is no difference between a single device with multiple
> independent channels and multiple independent devices with one channel each.
> Both have the same logical topology.
>
Yes, but in my case there is only one HW, one set of registers, and one
set of clocks, it should be a single device node in the device tree.
> - Lars
>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-16 2:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-13 13:37 [RFC PATCH] ASoC: Modify check condition of multiple bindings of components Koro Chen
2015-10-13 13:44 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2015-10-13 14:18 ` [alsa-devel] " Koro Chen
2015-10-13 14:42 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2015-10-14 1:19 ` Koro Chen
2015-10-14 9:00 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2015-10-15 12:10 ` Mark Brown
2015-10-15 12:49 ` Koro Chen
2015-10-15 13:26 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2015-10-16 2:31 ` Koro Chen [this message]
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=1444962713.31246.6.camel@mtksdaap41 \
--to=koro.chen@mediatek.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).