| Message ID | 87r226x8aq.wl-kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | ASoC: fixup topology dai_link remove issue | expand |
On 11/17/19 7:49 PM, Kuninori Morimoto wrote: > > Hi Mark > Cc Pierre-Louis, Takashi-san > > Currently, I'm focusing to ASoC cleanup / balance-up. > But, it found more unbalance issue, and Intel noticed about it. > These patches fix dai_link remove issue on topology. > > I want to get Acked-by or Reviewed-by from Takashi-san > for 2) patch if possible. > > These are already tested by Intel CI, and all issues were solved. > (https://github.com/thesofproject/linux/pull/1504) > Extra Tested-by / Reviewed-by are very welcome from Intel if you don't mind I'd like to retest this new series, it's based on a different tip and is not exactly the same as before. e.g. we tested this: - /* free the ALSA card at first; this syncs with pending operations */ - if (card->snd_card) { - snd_card_free(card->snd_card); - card->snd_card = NULL; - } + if (card->snd_card) + snd_card_disconnect_sync(card->snd_card); /* remove and free each DAI */ soc_remove_link_dais(card); + soc_remove_link_components(card); and the new code shows this - /* free the ALSA card at first; this syncs with pending operations */ - if (card->snd_card) { - snd_card_free(card->snd_card); - card->snd_card = NULL; - } + if (card->snd_card) + snd_card_disconnect_sync(card->snd_card); snd_soc_dapm_shutdown(card); <<< not tested yet. /* remove and free each DAI */ soc_remove_link_dais(card); + soc_remove_link_components(card); > > Kuninori Morimoto (2): > 1) ASoC: soc-component: tidyup snd_soc_pcm_component_new/free() parameter > 2) ASoC: soc-pcm: remove soc_pcm_private_free() > > include/sound/soc-component.h | 4 ++-- > sound/soc/soc-component.c | 8 +++----- > sound/soc/soc-core.c | 19 +++++++++++-------- > sound/soc/soc-pcm.c | 12 +----------- > 4 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) >
Hi Pierre-Louis > > These are already tested by Intel CI, and all issues were solved. > > (https://github.com/thesofproject/linux/pull/1504) > > Extra Tested-by / Reviewed-by are very welcome from Intel > > if you don't mind I'd like to retest this new series, it's based on a > different tip and is not exactly the same as before. Yes, of course. Sorry I didn't mention about it. > - /* free the ALSA card at first; this syncs with pending operations */ > - if (card->snd_card) { > - snd_card_free(card->snd_card); > - card->snd_card = NULL; > - } > + if (card->snd_card) > + snd_card_disconnect_sync(card->snd_card); > > snd_soc_dapm_shutdown(card); <<< not tested yet. > > /* remove and free each DAI */ > soc_remove_link_dais(card); > + soc_remove_link_components(card); Yes. It is from 2a6f0892bda954dc2688b002060093ee0fe38528 ("ASoC: soc-core: call snd_soc_dapm_shutdown() at soc_cleanup_card_resources()") Thank you for your help !! Best regards --- Kuninori Morimoto
On 11/18/19 7:10 PM, Kuninori Morimoto wrote: > > Hi Pierre-Louis > >>> These are already tested by Intel CI, and all issues were solved. >>> (https://github.com/thesofproject/linux/pull/1504) >>> Extra Tested-by / Reviewed-by are very welcome from Intel >> >> if you don't mind I'd like to retest this new series, it's based on a >> different tip and is not exactly the same as before. > > Yes, of course. > Sorry I didn't mention about it. > >> - /* free the ALSA card at first; this syncs with pending operations */ >> - if (card->snd_card) { >> - snd_card_free(card->snd_card); >> - card->snd_card = NULL; >> - } >> + if (card->snd_card) >> + snd_card_disconnect_sync(card->snd_card); >> >> snd_soc_dapm_shutdown(card); <<< not tested yet. >> >> /* remove and free each DAI */ >> soc_remove_link_dais(card); >> + soc_remove_link_components(card); > > Yes. > It is from > > 2a6f0892bda954dc2688b002060093ee0fe38528 > ("ASoC: soc-core: call snd_soc_dapm_shutdown() at soc_cleanup_card_resources()") No regression detected so from the Intel side we're good with this patchset. Thanks Morimoto-san for this comprehensive analysis, really nice work!
On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 07:37:09AM -0600, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: > No regression detected so from the Intel side we're good with this patchset. > Thanks Morimoto-san for this comprehensive analysis, really nice work! Yes, thanks indeed for this - it's really great work.