Re: [PATCH 2/2] ASoC: tas2764: Add the driver for the TAS2764

[Dan Murphy <dmurphy@ti.com>]

Mark

Thanks for the review

On 10/1/20 11:25 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 11:38:09AM -0500, Dan Murphy wrote:
>
> This all looks good - a few very minor things below but nothing
> substantial:
>
>> +	default:
>> +		dev_err(tas2764->dev, "Not supported evevt\n");
>> +		return -EINVAL;
> evevt -> event
OK
>
>> +static int tas2764_mute(struct snd_soc_dai *dai, int mute, int direction)
>> +{
>> +	struct snd_soc_component *component = dai->component;
>> +	int ret = snd_soc_component_update_bits(component, TAS2764_PWR_CTRL,
>> +						TAS2764_PWR_CTRL_MASK,
>> +						mute ? TAS2764_PWR_CTRL_MUTE : 0);
>> +
>> +	if (ret < 0)
>> +		return ret;
> This looks weird with the ternery operator and extreme indentation -
> could you please at least split the declaration of ret from the call to
> make the line length a bit extreme?

I will fix it up


>> +	switch (fmt & SND_SOC_DAIFMT_FORMAT_MASK) {
>> +	case SND_SOC_DAIFMT_I2S:
>> +	case SND_SOC_DAIFMT_DSP_A:
>> +		tdm_rx_start_slot = 1;
>> +		break;
>> +	case SND_SOC_DAIFMT_DSP_B:
>> +	case SND_SOC_DAIFMT_LEFT_J:
>> +		tdm_rx_start_slot = 0;
>> +		break;
> I'm not seeing any other handling that distinguishes between the I2S and
> DSP modes anywhere - I'm guessing this is because the device is really
> only implementing the DSP modes but because it's mono this is compatible
> with the I2S modes?  It'd be worth having a comment saying this since
> while that would be OK not distinguishing between modes properly is a
> common error in drivers so it'd help avoid cut'n'paste issues if someone
> uses this code as a reference.

Ah it does do LEFT J and Right J so I will fix this


>> +static int tas2764_register_codec(struct tas2764_priv *tas2764)
>> +{
>> +	return devm_snd_soc_register_component(tas2764->dev,
>> +					       &soc_component_driver_tas2764,
>> +					       tas2764_dai_driver,
>> +					       ARRAY_SIZE(tas2764_dai_driver));
>> +}
> This is a bit odd - can we not just inline the component registration
> rather than having this function?

I will eliminate this completely and move to i2c_probe

Dan