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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39445ECE58D for ; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 22:00:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1B7421D7C for ; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 22:00:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="Jeyw1ZDd" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A1B7421D7C Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46vNQ71T0mzDqdG for ; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 09:00:31 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com (client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::543; helo=mail-pg1-x543.google.com; envelope-from=nicoleotsuka@gmail.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="Jeyw1ZDd"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-pg1-x543.google.com (mail-pg1-x543.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::543]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46vNJF1PbyzDqck for ; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 08:55:25 +1100 (AEDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x543.google.com with SMTP id e15so2096945pgu.13 for ; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 14:55:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=MJq2EdV7BErF5lJZPOikwtBvnPNcMCKE+E09QYJDAoE=; b=Jeyw1ZDd5uAKRjJQmfyb+T0v/f6rIVWTceUIwX20g2+Ga6I91WfJuBnTL/DPxTZL5z HKJjnkJAncD5XImoBq7AkDzdyK97rJN/7OH0yKTx8fzWkLRU1nyrjtxhEcw8zzso+0U2 DJNGBkyCFX7HUwCQF+cTvU0l7AsQXoDkoevKLz3/HfKu55M/n9GQXtxQkwzao4e7UJAt W44oCFETT+1Hrfn9p/iGgjnkyGZMFObQP/F3nt5x+0IWbC4EIUW38BB7Srk5IZT63tzm SCfHVu2649tchRM12hl8UrKMunl00VbS/rcr8+rQayKOIAhfuW3jbPskVlbfAmqjS92i ygcw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=MJq2EdV7BErF5lJZPOikwtBvnPNcMCKE+E09QYJDAoE=; b=ZVUJLNq9ryZD0YxXPsEDnOBt9cj2r5dS7J86dTjKJucD2mng2cVxDzNElluwvDcsUg mtki0rL7bz22nH7lbRdB6WNbV0uO2PyYhNiurRVBd9n5ht9FE/XyuLlPIQMOC9/4bkC0 6QAzLyEDkLszH5uvudlIB9jF3w7uVqhZeZ1g+S8hkjhdIpqNFaR0oTEZjy8zqwLIxRXw +7NGJltZYsAJP2JvsffcfNbVi/d3/nQ3DmM0JszHPIumh7TfpbPMlBN1NzWNbm8t4ls/ PBY83XFUsdVoPCuYAV8xCd5oxWuVCRFfh6Sbz4GRfAUutXB2oRpKS4IzpRPOOaOunCxA GaoQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVsaxSifxgeHciri7mgTg0zuHSeJ6JhblFn8PeCyGSqFF4FWFEN AOzuj5vyKOCFu58tOYk59nw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw78bUK9yECzvnmzVx8o9WcY5erYsU7dMfmJka8ZozhZHP1ynlTvAkvFQxYqlruVSaWIpHZTg== X-Received: by 2002:aa7:93de:: with SMTP id y30mr2552141pff.98.1571349321994; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 14:55:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Asurada-Nvidia.nvidia.com (thunderhill.nvidia.com. [216.228.112.22]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y8sm3577837pgs.34.2019.10.17.14.55.20 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Thu, 17 Oct 2019 14:55:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2019 14:54:53 -0700 From: Nicolin Chen To: Shengjiu Wang Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl_asrc: refine the setting of internal clock divider Message-ID: <20191017215452.GA19069@Asurada-Nvidia.nvidia.com> References: <1571293268-5146-1-git-send-email-shengjiu.wang@nxp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1571293268-5146-1-git-send-email-shengjiu.wang@nxp.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, timur@kernel.org, Xiubo.Lee@gmail.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, tiwai@suse.com, lgirdwood@gmail.com, perex@perex.cz, broonie@kernel.org, festevam@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Hello Shengjiu, On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 02:21:08PM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote: > For P2P output, the output divider should align with the output sample I think we should avoid "P2P" (or "M2M") keyword in the mainline code as we know M2M will never get merged while somebody working with the mainline and caring about new feature might be confused. > rate, if use ideal sample rate, there will be a lot of overload, which > would cause underrun. If I understand it correctly, setting to ideal ratio provides a faster converting speed but increases the load of the processor of ASRC. So we choose a slower converting speed here since real- time playback mode doesn't really need a faster conversion? It makes sense to me, yet I feel that the delay at the beginning of the audio playback might be longer as a compromise. I am okay with this decision though... > The maximum divider of asrc clock is 1024, but there is no judgement > for this limitaion in driver, which may cause the divider setting not > correct. > > For non-ideal ratio mode, the clock rate should divide the sample rate > with no remainder, and the quotient should be less than 1024. > > Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang > --- > sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c > index 0bf91a6f54b9..44d05ec28bd3 100644 > --- a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c > +++ b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c > @@ -260,7 +260,7 @@ static int fsl_asrc_set_ideal_ratio(struct fsl_asrc_pair *pair, > * of struct asrc_config which includes in/output sample rate, width, channel > * and clock settings. > */ > -static int fsl_asrc_config_pair(struct fsl_asrc_pair *pair) > +static int fsl_asrc_config_pair(struct fsl_asrc_pair *pair, bool p2p) > { > struct asrc_config *config = pair->config; > struct fsl_asrc *asrc_priv = pair->asrc_priv; > @@ -268,7 +268,8 @@ static int fsl_asrc_config_pair(struct fsl_asrc_pair *pair) > enum asrc_word_width input_word_width; > enum asrc_word_width output_word_width; > u32 inrate, outrate, indiv, outdiv; > - u32 clk_index[2], div[2]; > + u32 clk_index[2], div[2], rem[2]; > + u64 clk_rate; > int in, out, channels; > int pre_proc, post_proc; > struct clk *clk; > @@ -351,7 +352,9 @@ static int fsl_asrc_config_pair(struct fsl_asrc_pair *pair) > /* We only have output clock for ideal ratio mode */ > clk = asrc_priv->asrck_clk[clk_index[ideal ? OUT : IN]]; > > - div[IN] = clk_get_rate(clk) / inrate; > + clk_rate = clk_get_rate(clk); The fsl_asrc.c file has config.inclk being set to INCLK_NONE and this sets the "ideal" in this function to true. So, although we tend to not use ideal ratio setting for p2p cases, yet the input clock is still not physically connected, so we still use output clock for div[IN] calculation? I am thinking something simplier: if we decided not to use ideal ratio for "P2P", instead of adding "bool p2p" with the confusing "ideal" in this function, could we just set config.inclk to the same clock as the output one for "P2P"? By doing so, "P2P" won't go through ideal ratio mode while still having a clock rate from the output clock for div[IN] calculation here. > + rem[IN] = do_div(clk_rate, inrate); > + div[IN] = (u32)clk_rate; > if (div[IN] == 0) { Could we check div[IN] and rem[IN] here? Like: if (div[IN] == 0 || div[IN] > 1024) { pair_err(); goto out; } if (!ideal && rem[IN]) { pair_err(); goto out; } According to your commit log, I think the max-1024 limitation should be applied to all cases, not confined to "!ideal" cases right? And we should add some comments also, indicating it is limited by hardware. > pair_err("failed to support input sample rate %dHz by asrck_%x\n", > inrate, clk_index[ideal ? OUT : IN]); > @@ -360,11 +363,20 @@ static int fsl_asrc_config_pair(struct fsl_asrc_pair *pair) > > clk = asrc_priv->asrck_clk[clk_index[OUT]]; > > - /* Use fixed output rate for Ideal Ratio mode (INCLK_NONE) */ > - if (ideal) > - div[OUT] = clk_get_rate(clk) / IDEAL_RATIO_RATE; > - else > - div[OUT] = clk_get_rate(clk) / outrate; > + /* > + * When P2P mode, output rate should align with the out samplerate. > + * if set too high output rate, there will be lots of Overload. > + * When M2M mode, output rate should also need to align with the out For this "should", do you actually mean "M2M could also"? Sorry, I'm just trying to understand everyting here, not intentionally being picky at words. My understanding is that we still keep the ideal ratio setting because "M2M" still uses it. > + * samplerate, but M2M must use less time to achieve good performance. > + */ > + clk_rate = clk_get_rate(clk); > + if (p2p || !ideal) { > + rem[OUT] = do_div(clk_rate, outrate); > + div[OUT] = clk_rate; > + } else { > + rem[OUT] = do_div(clk_rate, IDEAL_RATIO_RATE); > + div[OUT] = clk_rate; > + } > > if (div[OUT] == 0) { > pair_err("failed to support output sample rate %dHz by asrck_%x\n", > @@ -372,6 +384,16 @@ static int fsl_asrc_config_pair(struct fsl_asrc_pair *pair) > return -EINVAL; > } > > + if (!ideal && (div[IN] > 1024 || div[OUT] > 1024 || > + rem[IN] != 0 || rem[OUT] != 0)) { > + if (!ideal && (div[IN] > 1024 || div[OUT] > 1024 || rem[IN] || rem[OUT] != 0)) { So for ideal == true, these limitaions are not applied any more? Remember that the "ideal" is true for "p2p == true" cases here. > + pair_err("The divider can't be used for non ideal mode\n"); > + return -EINVAL; > + } > + > + /* Divider range is [1, 1024] */ > + div[IN] = min_t(u32, 1024, div[IN]); > + div[OUT] = min_t(u32, 1024, div[OUT]); Hmm, this looks like we want to allow ideal ratio cases and p2p cases to operate any way, even if the divider wasn't within the range to get the in/out rates from the output clock?