[PATCHv2 1/8] ALSA: Add SAI SoC Digital Audio Interface driver.

[Li Xiubo]

> > From the ASoC subsystem comments we can see that:
> > ++++++
> > Configures the clock dividers. This is used to derive the best DAI bit
> > and frame clocks from the system or master clock. It's best to set the
> > DAI bit and frame clocks as low as possible to save system power.
> > ------
> 
> You should never use this unless you have to, there is no point in every
> single machine driver using your driver having to duplicate the same
> calculations.
> 

Okey, I'll think it over, if not have to, I will revise this.

> >
> > > > +static int fsl_sai_dai_probe(struct snd_soc_dai *dai) {
> > > > +	int ret;
> > > > +	struct fsl_sai *sai = dev_get_drvdata(dai->dev);
> > > > +
> > > > +	ret = clk_prepare_enable(sai->clk);
> > > > +	if (ret)
> > > > +		return ret;
> 
> > > It'd be nicer to only enable the clock while the device is in active
> use.
> 
> > While if the module clock is not enabled here, the followed registers
> cannot read/write in the same function.
> > And this _probe function is the _dai_probe not the driver's module
> _probe.
> 
> So you can enable the clock when you explicitly need to write to the
> registers...
> 
> > If the clk_prepare_enable(sai->clk) is not here, where should it be
> will be nicer ?
> > One of the following functions ?
> >         .set_sysclk     = fsl_sai_set_dai_sysclk,
> >         .set_clkdiv     = fsl_sai_set_dai_clkdiv,
> >         .set_fmt        = fsl_sai_set_dai_fmt,
> >         .set_tdm_slot   = fsl_sai_set_dai_tdm_slot,
> >         .hw_params      = fsl_sai_hw_params,
> >         .trigger        = fsl_sai_trigger,
> 
> It could be in any or all of them except trigger (where the core should
> hold a runtime PM reference anyway).  You can always take a reference for
> the duration of the function if you're concerned it may be called when
> the referent isn't otherwise held.
> 

While in this _sai_dai_probe function just followed the clock enable sentence, there are some register writing operations:
The PATCH:
+++++++++++++++++++++++
+static int fsl_sai_dai_probe(struct snd_soc_dai *dai) {
+	int ret;
+	struct fsl_sai *sai = dev_get_drvdata(dai->dev);
+
+	ret = clk_prepare_enable(sai->clk);                     =====> clock enable here
+	if (ret)
+		return ret;
+
+	writel(0x0, sai->base + FSL_SAI_RCSR);			  ======>registers writing here.
+	writel(0x0, sai->base + FSL_SAI_TCSR);			  ======> and here
+	writel(sai->dma_params_tx.maxburst, sai->base + FSL_SAI_TCR1); =======>and here
+	writel(sai->dma_params_rx.maxburst, sai->base + FSL_SAI_RCR1); =======>and here
+
+	dai->playback_dma_data = &sai->dma_params_tx;
+	dai->capture_dma_data = &sai->dma_params_rx;
+
+	snd_soc_dai_set_drvdata(dai, sai);
+
+	return 0;
+}
-------------------------

As your opinions, should I move the four register writing operations to .set_sysclk/set_clkdiv/... functions too ?
Or just add a clk_disable_unprepare() after them here, and then add clk_prepare_enable in one of .set_sysclk/set_clkdiv/...?

And the first two of this four registers must be initialize as early as possible, and if move them to one of the .set_sysclk/set_clkdiv/... functions,
How can I very ensure which one is the first to be called ?
Won't the calling sequence be changed in the feature ?

>From the debug logs, we can see that:
1, _sai_probe
This is called when the machine brings up and has one SAI device.

2, _sai_dai_probe
3, .set_sysclk
4, .set_fmt
Are called in order when the machine has Audio driver and is enabled, and also while the machine brings up.

The above four steps only be called one time in order.

When aplay/arecord is runs the following will be called in order:
5, .set_tdm_slot
6, .hw_param
7, .trigger -->begain 
8, .trigger --> end

The 2,3,4 are always called almost the same time, and they are all have register read/write operations.
Now the clk_prepare_enable() is in step 2, and it won't be any different moving to step 3 or 4.

So, only could move it to step 5 or 6, if so every time the aplay/arecord runs, clk_prepare_enable() will be
called, and there has no chance to call clk_disable_unprepare().

Now from the code we can see that I have add clk_prepare_enable() in _sai_dai_probe() and clk_disable_unprepare() in _sai_dai_remove().
Isn't this okey ?



> > > > +	ret = snd_dmaengine_pcm_register(&pdev->dev, NULL,
> > > > +			SND_DMAENGINE_PCM_FLAG_NO_RESIDUE);
> > > > +	if (ret)
> > > > +		return ret;
> 
> > > We should have a devm_ version of this.
> 
> > Sorry, is there one patch for adding the devm_ version of
> snd_dmaengine_pcm_register() already ?
> > In the -next and other topics branches I could not find it.
> 
> No, there isn't one but there should be one.
>
And if it has existed then I will use it.




BRs,
Xiubo