Re: [PATCH 5/7] ASoC: imx-pcm-rpmsg: Add platform driver for audio base on rpmsg

[Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 11:00 PM Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 02:57:28PM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote:
>
> > +     if (params_format(params) == SNDRV_PCM_FORMAT_S16_LE)
> > +             msg->s_msg.param.format   = RPMSG_S16_LE;
> > +     else if (params_format(params) == SNDRV_PCM_FORMAT_S24_LE)
>
> Again this should be a switch statement.
>
> > +     if (params_channels(params) == 1)
> > +             msg->s_msg.param.channels = RPMSG_CH_LEFT;
> > +     else
> > +             msg->s_msg.param.channels = RPMSG_CH_STEREO;
>
> Shouldn't this be reporting an error if the number of channels is more
> than 2?
>
> > +             /*
> > +              * if the data in the buffer is less than one period
> > +              * send message immediately.
> > +              * if there is more than one period data, delay one
> > +              * period (timer) to send the message.
> > +              */
> > +             if ((avail - writen_num * period_size) <= period_size) {
> > +                     imx_rpmsg_insert_workqueue(substream, msg, info);
> > +             } else if (rpmsg->force_lpa && !timer_pending(timer)) {
> > +                     int time_msec;
> > +
> > +                     time_msec = (int)(runtime->period_size * 1000 / runtime->rate);
> > +                     mod_timer(timer, jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(time_msec));
> > +             }
>
> The comment here is at least confusing - why would we not send a full
> buffer immediately if we have one?  This sounds like it's the opposite
> way round to what we'd do if we were trying to cut down the number of
> messages.  It might help to say which buffer and where?
>
> > +     /**
> > +      * Every work in the work queue, first we check if there
>
> /** comments are only for kerneldoc.

Thanks Mark, I will update them.

Best regards
wang shengjiu