| Message ID | 20200311180422.28363-1-srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | ASoC: qdsp6: fix default FE dais and routings. | expand |
On 11-03-20, 18:04, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: > QDSP6 Frontend dais can be configured to work in rx or tx or both rx/tx mode, > however the default routing do not honour this DT configuration making sound > card fail to probe. FE dais are also not fully honouring device tree configuration. > Fix both of them. > > Originally issue was reported by Vinod Koul Thanks Srini for the these :) I have tested on DB845c. And they work just fine after adding the DTS bits. Tested-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
Hi Srini, On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 06:04:20PM +0000, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: > QDSP6 Frontend dais can be configured to work in rx or tx or both rx/tx mode, > however the default routing do not honour this DT configuration making sound > card fail to probe. FE dais are also not fully honouring device tree configuration. > Fix both of them. > I discovered this patch set when QDSP6 audio stopped working after upgrading to Linux 5.7-rc1. As far as I understand, device tree bindings should attempt to be backwards compatible wherever possible. This isn't the case here, although this is not the reason for my mail. (I don't mind updating my device tree, especially since it is not upstream yet...) I have a general question about the design here. I understand the original motivation for this patch set: Attempting to configure a TX/RX-only DAI was not possible due to the default routing. In my opinion this is only relevant for the compressed DAI case. If we ignore the compressed DAIs for a moment (which can be unidirectional only), I think we shouldn't care how userspace uses the available FE/MultiMedia DAIs. We have this huge routing matrix in q6routing, with 800+ mixers that can be configured in any way possible from userspace. In "ASoC: qdsp6: q6asm-dai: only enable dais from device tree" you mention: > This can lead to un-necessary dais in the system which will never be > used. So honour whats specfied in device tree. but IMO the FE DAIs are a negligible overhead compared to the routing matrix and the many BE DAIs that are really never going to be used (because nothing is physically connected to the ports). Even if you restrict FE DAIs to RX/TX only, or disable them entirely, all the routing mixers still exist for them. They will just result in configurations that are not usable in any way. IMO the only thing we gain by restricting the FE DAIs is that the available mixers no longer match possible configurations. Before this patch set I used a slightly different approach in my device tree for MSM8916: I kept all FE DAIs bi-directional, and added DAI links for all of them. This means that I actually had 8 bi-directional PCM devices in userspace. I didn't use all of them - my ALSA UCM configuration only uses MultiMedia1 for playback and MultiMedia2 for capture. However, some other userspace (let's say Android) could have chosen different FE DAIs for whatever reason. We have the overhead for the routing matrix anyway, so we might as well expose it in my opinion. My question is: In what way are the FE DAIs really board-specific? If we expose only some FE DAIs with intended usage per board, e.g. MultiMedia1 for HDMI, MultiMedia2 for slimbus playback, MultiMedia3 for slimbus capture, I could almost argue that we don't need DPCM at all. The FE DAIs are always going to be used for the same backend anyway. This is a bit exaggerated - for example if you have a single compress DAI per board you probably intend to use it for both HDMI/slimbus. But this is the feeling I get if we configure the FE DAIs separately for each board. I wonder if we should leave configuration of the FE DAIs up to userspace (e.g. ALSA UCM), and expose the same full set of FE DAIs for each board. I think this is mostly a matter of convention for configuring FE DAIs in the device tree - I have some ideas how to make that work with the existing device tree bindings and for compressed DAIs. But this mail is already long enough as-is. ;) I also don't mind if we keep everything as-is - I just wanted to share what I have been thinking about. What do you think? Thanks for reading! ;) Stephan > Originally issue was reported by Vinod Koul > > Srinivas Kandagatla (2): > ASoC: qdsp6: q6asm-dai: only enable dais from device tree > ASoC: qdsp6: q6routing: remove default routing > > sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6asm-dai.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++------- > sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6routing.c | 19 ------------------- > 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.21.0 >
On 17/04/2020 12:24, Stephan Gerhold wrote: > Hi Srini, > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 06:04:20PM +0000, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: >> QDSP6 Frontend dais can be configured to work in rx or tx or both rx/tx mode, >> however the default routing do not honour this DT configuration making sound >> card fail to probe. FE dais are also not fully honouring device tree configuration. >> Fix both of them. >> > > I discovered this patch set when QDSP6 audio stopped working after > upgrading to Linux 5.7-rc1. As far as I understand, device tree bindings > should attempt to be backwards compatible wherever possible. > This isn't the case here, although this is not the reason for my mail. > (I don't mind updating my device tree, especially since it is not > upstream yet...) > > I have a general question about the design here. > > I understand the original motivation for this patch set: Attempting to > configure a TX/RX-only DAI was not possible due to the default routing. > In my opinion this is only relevant for the compressed DAI case. > > If we ignore the compressed DAIs for a moment (which can be > unidirectional only), I think we shouldn't care how userspace uses the > available FE/MultiMedia DAIs. We have this huge routing matrix in q6routing, > with 800+ mixers that can be configured in any way possible from userspace. > > In "ASoC: qdsp6: q6asm-dai: only enable dais from device tree" you mention: > >> This can lead to un-necessary dais in the system which will never be >> used. So honour whats specfied in device tree. > > but IMO the FE DAIs are a negligible overhead compared to the routing > matrix and the many BE DAIs that are really never going to be used > (because nothing is physically connected to the ports). Two things, one unnecessary mixers, second thing is we need to know how many FE dais are in the system, which should be derived from the number of dai child nodes. These can potentially be SoC specific or firmware specific. My plan is to cleanup the BE DAIs as well!, any patches welcome! > > Even if you restrict FE DAIs to RX/TX only, or disable them entirely, I think this is mistake from myside. Alteast according to bindings direction property is only "Required for Compress offload dais", code should have explicitly ignored it. Here is change that should fix it. --------------------------->cut<--------------------------------- diff --git a/sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6asm-dai.c b/sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6asm-dai.c index 125af00bba53..31f46b25978e 100644 --- a/sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6asm-dai.c +++ b/sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6asm-dai.c @@ -1067,6 +1067,11 @@ static int of_q6asm_parse_dai_data(struct device *dev, dai_drv = &pdata->dais[idx++]; *dai_drv = q6asm_fe_dais_template[id]; + if (of_property_read_bool(node, "is-compress-dai")) + dai_drv->compress_new = snd_soc_new_compress; + else + continue; + ret = of_property_read_u32(node, "direction", &dir); if (ret) continue; @@ -1076,8 +1081,6 @@ static int of_q6asm_parse_dai_data(struct device *dev, else if (dir == Q6ASM_DAI_TX) dai_drv->playback = empty_stream; - if (of_property_read_bool(node, "is-compress-dai")) - dai_drv->compress_new = snd_soc_new_compress; } return 0; --------------------------->cut<--------------------------------- Thanks, srini > all the routing mixers still exist for them. They will just result in > configurations that are not usable in any way. IMO the only thing we > gain by restricting the FE DAIs is that the available mixers no longer > match possible configurations. > > Before this patch set I used a slightly different approach in my device > tree for MSM8916: I kept all FE DAIs bi-directional, and added DAI links > for all of them. This means that I actually had 8 bi-directional PCM > devices in userspace. > > I didn't use all of them - my ALSA UCM configuration only uses > MultiMedia1 for playback and MultiMedia2 for capture. > However, some other userspace (let's say Android) could have chosen > different FE DAIs for whatever reason. We have the overhead for the > routing matrix anyway, so we might as well expose it in my opinion. > > My question is: In what way are the FE DAIs really board-specific? > > If we expose only some FE DAIs with intended usage per board, > e.g. MultiMedia1 for HDMI, MultiMedia2 for slimbus playback, > MultiMedia3 for slimbus capture, > I could almost argue that we don't need DPCM at all. > The FE DAIs are always going to be used for the same backend anyway. > > This is a bit exaggerated - for example if you have a single compress > DAI per board you probably intend to use it for both HDMI/slimbus. > But this is the feeling I get if we configure the FE DAIs separately > for each board. > > I wonder if we should leave configuration of the FE DAIs up to userspace > (e.g. ALSA UCM), and expose the same full set of FE DAIs for each board. > > I think this is mostly a matter of convention for configuring FE DAIs > in the device tree - I have some ideas how to make that work > with the existing device tree bindings and for compressed DAIs. > But this mail is already long enough as-is. ;) > > I also don't mind if we keep everything as-is > - I just wanted to share what I have been thinking about. > > What do you think? > > Thanks for reading! ;) > Stephan > >> Originally issue was reported by Vinod Koul >> >> Srinivas Kandagatla (2): >> ASoC: qdsp6: q6asm-dai: only enable dais from device tree >> ASoC: qdsp6: q6routing: remove default routing >> >> sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6asm-dai.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++------- >> sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6routing.c | 19 ------------------- >> 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) >> >> -- >> 2.21.0 >>
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 02:02:08PM +0100, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: > On 17/04/2020 12:24, Stephan Gerhold wrote: > > but IMO the FE DAIs are a negligible overhead compared to the routing > > matrix and the many BE DAIs that are really never going to be used > > (because nothing is physically connected to the ports). > Two things, one unnecessary mixers, second thing is we need to know how many > FE dais are in the system, which should be derived from the number of dai > child nodes. These can potentially be SoC specific or firmware specific. You shouldn't be worrying about unused mixers, ideally we'd be walking the DAPM graph and masking things - this isn't something that should be open coded at individual driver levels.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 02:02:08PM +0100, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: > > > On 17/04/2020 12:24, Stephan Gerhold wrote: > > Hi Srini, > > > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 06:04:20PM +0000, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: > > > QDSP6 Frontend dais can be configured to work in rx or tx or both rx/tx mode, > > > however the default routing do not honour this DT configuration making sound > > > card fail to probe. FE dais are also not fully honouring device tree configuration. > > > Fix both of them. > > > > > > > I discovered this patch set when QDSP6 audio stopped working after > > upgrading to Linux 5.7-rc1. As far as I understand, device tree bindings > > should attempt to be backwards compatible wherever possible. > > This isn't the case here, although this is not the reason for my mail. > > (I don't mind updating my device tree, especially since it is not > > upstream yet...) > > > > I have a general question about the design here. > > > > I understand the original motivation for this patch set: Attempting to > > configure a TX/RX-only DAI was not possible due to the default routing. > > In my opinion this is only relevant for the compressed DAI case. > > > > If we ignore the compressed DAIs for a moment (which can be > > unidirectional only), I think we shouldn't care how userspace uses the > > available FE/MultiMedia DAIs. We have this huge routing matrix in q6routing, > > with 800+ mixers that can be configured in any way possible from userspace. > > > > In "ASoC: qdsp6: q6asm-dai: only enable dais from device tree" you mention: > > > > > This can lead to un-necessary dais in the system which will never be > > > used. So honour whats specfied in device tree. > > > > but IMO the FE DAIs are a negligible overhead compared to the routing > > matrix and the many BE DAIs that are really never going to be used > > (because nothing is physically connected to the ports). > > Two things, one unnecessary mixers, second thing is we need to know how many > FE dais are in the system, which should be derived from the number of dai > child nodes. These can potentially be SoC specific or firmware specific. > So there are SoCs/firmwares that just support e.g. MultiMedia1-4 and not all 8 MultiMedia FE DAIs? > My plan is to cleanup the BE DAIs as well!, any patches welcome! > > > > > Even if you restrict FE DAIs to RX/TX only, or disable them entirely, > > I think this is mistake from myside. Alteast according to bindings direction > property is only "Required for Compress offload dais", code should have > explicitly ignored it. Here is change that should fix it. > This would make the MultiMedia1-3 bi-directional in sdm845-db845c, but MultiMedia5-8 would still be disabled. My question here would then be similar as above: Is this an arbitrary selection of a reasonable amount of FE DAIs, or actually based on some firmware limitations? As I described in the rest of my mail (below your diff), before this patch set it was simple to just expose all 8 FE DAIs. At least on MSM8916 all of them work in exactly the same way, there is no difference between any of them. If we list what is working in SoC/firmware in the device tree, would I just list all 8 FE DAIs? Basically I'm still trying to understand why we limit the number of FE/MultiMedia DAIs that we expose, when all of them would be working fine. :) Thanks, Stephan > --------------------------->cut<--------------------------------- > diff --git a/sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6asm-dai.c > b/sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6asm-dai.c > index 125af00bba53..31f46b25978e 100644 > --- a/sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6asm-dai.c > +++ b/sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6asm-dai.c > @@ -1067,6 +1067,11 @@ static int of_q6asm_parse_dai_data(struct device > *dev, > dai_drv = &pdata->dais[idx++]; > *dai_drv = q6asm_fe_dais_template[id]; > > + if (of_property_read_bool(node, "is-compress-dai")) > + dai_drv->compress_new = snd_soc_new_compress; > + else > + continue; > + > ret = of_property_read_u32(node, "direction", &dir); > if (ret) > continue; > @@ -1076,8 +1081,6 @@ static int of_q6asm_parse_dai_data(struct device *dev, > else if (dir == Q6ASM_DAI_TX) > dai_drv->playback = empty_stream; > > - if (of_property_read_bool(node, "is-compress-dai")) > - dai_drv->compress_new = snd_soc_new_compress; > } > > return 0; > > --------------------------->cut<--------------------------------- > > Thanks, > srini > > > all the routing mixers still exist for them. They will just result in > > configurations that are not usable in any way. IMO the only thing we > > gain by restricting the FE DAIs is that the available mixers no longer > > match possible configurations. > > > > Before this patch set I used a slightly different approach in my device > > tree for MSM8916: I kept all FE DAIs bi-directional, and added DAI links > > for all of them. This means that I actually had 8 bi-directional PCM > > devices in userspace. > > > > I didn't use all of them - my ALSA UCM configuration only uses > > MultiMedia1 for playback and MultiMedia2 for capture. > > However, some other userspace (let's say Android) could have chosen > > different FE DAIs for whatever reason. We have the overhead for the > > routing matrix anyway, so we might as well expose it in my opinion. > > > > My question is: In what way are the FE DAIs really board-specific? > > > > If we expose only some FE DAIs with intended usage per board, > > e.g. MultiMedia1 for HDMI, MultiMedia2 for slimbus playback, > > MultiMedia3 for slimbus capture, > > I could almost argue that we don't need DPCM at all. > > The FE DAIs are always going to be used for the same backend anyway. > > > > This is a bit exaggerated - for example if you have a single compress > > DAI per board you probably intend to use it for both HDMI/slimbus. > > But this is the feeling I get if we configure the FE DAIs separately > > for each board. > > > > I wonder if we should leave configuration of the FE DAIs up to userspace > > (e.g. ALSA UCM), and expose the same full set of FE DAIs for each board. > > > > I think this is mostly a matter of convention for configuring FE DAIs > > in the device tree - I have some ideas how to make that work > > with the existing device tree bindings and for compressed DAIs. > > But this mail is already long enough as-is. ;) > > > > I also don't mind if we keep everything as-is > > - I just wanted to share what I have been thinking about. > > > > What do you think? > > > > Thanks for reading! ;) > > Stephan > > > > > Originally issue was reported by Vinod Koul > > > > > > Srinivas Kandagatla (2): > > > ASoC: qdsp6: q6asm-dai: only enable dais from device tree > > > ASoC: qdsp6: q6routing: remove default routing > > > > > > sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6asm-dai.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++------- > > > sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6routing.c | 19 ------------------- > > > 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) > > > > > > -- > > > 2.21.0 > > >
On 17/04/2020 16:35, Stephan Gerhold wrote: > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 02:02:08PM +0100, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: >> >> >> On 17/04/2020 12:24, Stephan Gerhold wrote: >>> Hi Srini, >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 06:04:20PM +0000, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: >>>> QDSP6 Frontend dais can be configured to work in rx or tx or both rx/tx mode, >>>> however the default routing do not honour this DT configuration making sound >>>> card fail to probe. FE dais are also not fully honouring device tree configuration. >>>> Fix both of them. >>>> >>> >>> I discovered this patch set when QDSP6 audio stopped working after >>> upgrading to Linux 5.7-rc1. As far as I understand, device tree bindings >>> should attempt to be backwards compatible wherever possible. >>> This isn't the case here, although this is not the reason for my mail. >>> (I don't mind updating my device tree, especially since it is not >>> upstream yet...) >>> >>> I have a general question about the design here. >>> >>> I understand the original motivation for this patch set: Attempting to >>> configure a TX/RX-only DAI was not possible due to the default routing. >>> In my opinion this is only relevant for the compressed DAI case. >>> >>> If we ignore the compressed DAIs for a moment (which can be >>> unidirectional only), I think we shouldn't care how userspace uses the >>> available FE/MultiMedia DAIs. We have this huge routing matrix in q6routing, >>> with 800+ mixers that can be configured in any way possible from userspace. >>> >>> In "ASoC: qdsp6: q6asm-dai: only enable dais from device tree" you mention: >>> >>>> This can lead to un-necessary dais in the system which will never be >>>> used. So honour whats specfied in device tree. >>> >>> but IMO the FE DAIs are a negligible overhead compared to the routing >>> matrix and the many BE DAIs that are really never going to be used >>> (because nothing is physically connected to the ports). >> >> Two things, one unnecessary mixers, second thing is we need to know how many >> FE dais are in the system, which should be derived from the number of dai >> child nodes. These can potentially be SoC specific or firmware specific. >> > > So there are SoCs/firmwares that just support e.g. MultiMedia1-4 and not > all 8 MultiMedia FE DAIs? > This all depends on vendor customization to the firmware. Normally Q6ASM supports up to 8 concurrent streams. >> My plan is to cleanup the BE DAIs as well!, any patches welcome! >> >>> >>> Even if you restrict FE DAIs to RX/TX only, or disable them entirely, >> >> I think this is mistake from myside. Alteast according to bindings direction >> property is only "Required for Compress offload dais", code should have >> explicitly ignored it. Here is change that should fix it. >> > > This would make the MultiMedia1-3 bi-directional in sdm845-db845c, > but MultiMedia5-8 would still be disabled. > > My question here would then be similar as above: > Is this an arbitrary selection of a reasonable amount of FE DAIs, > or actually based on some firmware limitations? Yes, it is purely firmware limitation. > > As I described in the rest of my mail (below your diff), > before this patch set it was simple to just expose all 8 FE DAIs. > At least on MSM8916 all of them work in exactly the same way, > there is no difference between any of them. > > If we list what is working in SoC/firmware in the device tree, > would I just list all 8 FE DAIs? That is the direction, which should also include any dai specific properties like compressed case. > > Basically I'm still trying to understand why we limit the number of > FE/MultiMedia DAIs that we expose, when all of them would be working > fine. :) I don't think we need to limit this from Linux side, but Its important to take care of the max allowed Q6ASM dais w.r.t DSP. --srini > > Thanks, > Stephan > >> --------------------------->cut<--------------------------------- >> diff --git a/sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6asm-dai.c >> b/sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6asm-dai.c >> index 125af00bba53..31f46b25978e 100644 >> --- a/sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6asm-dai.c >> +++ b/sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6asm-dai.c >> @@ -1067,6 +1067,11 @@ static int of_q6asm_parse_dai_data(struct device >> *dev, >> dai_drv = &pdata->dais[idx++]; >> *dai_drv = q6asm_fe_dais_template[id]; >> >> + if (of_property_read_bool(node, "is-compress-dai")) >> + dai_drv->compress_new = snd_soc_new_compress; >> + else >> + continue; >> + >> ret = of_property_read_u32(node, "direction", &dir); >> if (ret) >> continue; >> @@ -1076,8 +1081,6 @@ static int of_q6asm_parse_dai_data(struct device *dev, >> else if (dir == Q6ASM_DAI_TX) >> dai_drv->playback = empty_stream; >> >> - if (of_property_read_bool(node, "is-compress-dai")) >> - dai_drv->compress_new = snd_soc_new_compress; >> } >> >> return 0; >> >> --------------------------->cut<--------------------------------- >> >> Thanks, >> srini >> >>> all the routing mixers still exist for them. They will just result in >>> configurations that are not usable in any way. IMO the only thing we >>> gain by restricting the FE DAIs is that the available mixers no longer >>> match possible configurations. >>> >>> Before this patch set I used a slightly different approach in my device >>> tree for MSM8916: I kept all FE DAIs bi-directional, and added DAI links >>> for all of them. This means that I actually had 8 bi-directional PCM >>> devices in userspace. >>> >>> I didn't use all of them - my ALSA UCM configuration only uses >>> MultiMedia1 for playback and MultiMedia2 for capture. >>> However, some other userspace (let's say Android) could have chosen >>> different FE DAIs for whatever reason. We have the overhead for the >>> routing matrix anyway, so we might as well expose it in my opinion. >>> >>> My question is: In what way are the FE DAIs really board-specific? >>> >>> If we expose only some FE DAIs with intended usage per board, >>> e.g. MultiMedia1 for HDMI, MultiMedia2 for slimbus playback, >>> MultiMedia3 for slimbus capture, >>> I could almost argue that we don't need DPCM at all. >>> The FE DAIs are always going to be used for the same backend anyway. >>> >>> This is a bit exaggerated - for example if you have a single compress >>> DAI per board you probably intend to use it for both HDMI/slimbus. >>> But this is the feeling I get if we configure the FE DAIs separately >>> for each board. >>> >>> I wonder if we should leave configuration of the FE DAIs up to userspace >>> (e.g. ALSA UCM), and expose the same full set of FE DAIs for each board. >>> >>> I think this is mostly a matter of convention for configuring FE DAIs >>> in the device tree - I have some ideas how to make that work >>> with the existing device tree bindings and for compressed DAIs. >>> But this mail is already long enough as-is. ;) >>> >>> I also don't mind if we keep everything as-is >>> - I just wanted to share what I have been thinking about. >>> >>> What do you think? >>> >>> Thanks for reading! ;) >>> Stephan >>> >>>> Originally issue was reported by Vinod Koul >>>> >>>> Srinivas Kandagatla (2): >>>> ASoC: qdsp6: q6asm-dai: only enable dais from device tree >>>> ASoC: qdsp6: q6routing: remove default routing >>>> >>>> sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6asm-dai.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++------- >>>> sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6routing.c | 19 ------------------- >>>> 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 2.21.0 >>>>
On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 09:32:18AM +0100, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: > > > On 17/04/2020 16:35, Stephan Gerhold wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 02:02:08PM +0100, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 17/04/2020 12:24, Stephan Gerhold wrote: > > > > Hi Srini, > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 06:04:20PM +0000, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: > > > > > QDSP6 Frontend dais can be configured to work in rx or tx or both rx/tx mode, > > > > > however the default routing do not honour this DT configuration making sound > > > > > card fail to probe. FE dais are also not fully honouring device tree configuration. > > > > > Fix both of them. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I discovered this patch set when QDSP6 audio stopped working after > > > > upgrading to Linux 5.7-rc1. As far as I understand, device tree bindings > > > > should attempt to be backwards compatible wherever possible. > > > > This isn't the case here, although this is not the reason for my mail. > > > > (I don't mind updating my device tree, especially since it is not > > > > upstream yet...) > > > > > > > > I have a general question about the design here. > > > > > > > > I understand the original motivation for this patch set: Attempting to > > > > configure a TX/RX-only DAI was not possible due to the default routing. > > > > In my opinion this is only relevant for the compressed DAI case. > > > > > > > > If we ignore the compressed DAIs for a moment (which can be > > > > unidirectional only), I think we shouldn't care how userspace uses the > > > > available FE/MultiMedia DAIs. We have this huge routing matrix in q6routing, > > > > with 800+ mixers that can be configured in any way possible from userspace. > > > > > > > > In "ASoC: qdsp6: q6asm-dai: only enable dais from device tree" you mention: > > > > > > > > > This can lead to un-necessary dais in the system which will never be > > > > > used. So honour whats specfied in device tree. > > > > > > > > but IMO the FE DAIs are a negligible overhead compared to the routing > > > > matrix and the many BE DAIs that are really never going to be used > > > > (because nothing is physically connected to the ports). > > > > > > Two things, one unnecessary mixers, second thing is we need to know how many > > > FE dais are in the system, which should be derived from the number of dai > > > child nodes. These can potentially be SoC specific or firmware specific. > > > > > > > So there are SoCs/firmwares that just support e.g. MultiMedia1-4 and not > > all 8 MultiMedia FE DAIs? > > > > This all depends on vendor customization to the firmware. > Normally Q6ASM supports up to 8 concurrent streams. > I see, thank you! > > > My plan is to cleanup the BE DAIs as well!, any patches welcome! > > > > > > > > > > > Even if you restrict FE DAIs to RX/TX only, or disable them entirely, > > > > > > I think this is mistake from myside. Alteast according to bindings direction > > > property is only "Required for Compress offload dais", code should have > > > explicitly ignored it. Here is change that should fix it. > > > > > > > This would make the MultiMedia1-3 bi-directional in sdm845-db845c, > > but MultiMedia5-8 would still be disabled. > > > > My question here would then be similar as above: > > Is this an arbitrary selection of a reasonable amount of FE DAIs, > > or actually based on some firmware limitations? > Yes, it is purely firmware limitation. > > > > > As I described in the rest of my mail (below your diff), > > before this patch set it was simple to just expose all 8 FE DAIs. > > At least on MSM8916 all of them work in exactly the same way, > > there is no difference between any of them. > > > > If we list what is working in SoC/firmware in the device tree, > > would I just list all 8 FE DAIs? > > That is the direction, which should also include any dai specific properties > like compressed case. > > > > > Basically I'm still trying to understand why we limit the number of > > FE/MultiMedia DAIs that we expose, when all of them would be working > > fine. :) > I don't think we need to limit this from Linux side, but Its important to > take care of the max allowed Q6ASM dais w.r.t DSP. > I think the approach you added in this patch set makes sense if there are DSP firmwares that offer less FE/MultiMedia DAIs. For the future it would be nice if we could make this less "confusing" by hiding/removing the invalid mixers, e.g. if you have only MultiMedia1 enabled you don't see all the mixers for MultiMedia2-8. For that it doesn't matter if we do it in q6routing (might become quite complex with all the macros there), or in a generic way by walking the DAPM graph as Mark mentioned. I was also thinking if we can somehow restore the default routing in a conditional way, so that you don't need to duplicate the information in the device tree: e.g. right now you need to add &q6asm { dai@0 { reg = <0>; }; }; *and* the routing sound { audio-routing = "MM_DL1", "MultiMedia1 Playback", "MultiMedia1 Capture", "MM_UL1"; }; When I made these changes I needed several tries until I had it correct, because sometimes I forgot one of the routes, sometimes I mixed up some numbers etc. And especially when you add all 8 FE DAIs this becomes really noisy for an information that we could (theoretically) infer only based on the part under &q6asm. I will think about it some more and see if I come up with something nice. Thanks, Stephan > > > --------------------------->cut<--------------------------------- > > > diff --git a/sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6asm-dai.c > > > b/sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6asm-dai.c > > > index 125af00bba53..31f46b25978e 100644 > > > --- a/sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6asm-dai.c > > > +++ b/sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6asm-dai.c > > > @@ -1067,6 +1067,11 @@ static int of_q6asm_parse_dai_data(struct device > > > *dev, > > > dai_drv = &pdata->dais[idx++]; > > > *dai_drv = q6asm_fe_dais_template[id]; > > > > > > + if (of_property_read_bool(node, "is-compress-dai")) > > > + dai_drv->compress_new = snd_soc_new_compress; > > > + else > > > + continue; > > > + > > > ret = of_property_read_u32(node, "direction", &dir); > > > if (ret) > > > continue; > > > @@ -1076,8 +1081,6 @@ static int of_q6asm_parse_dai_data(struct device *dev, > > > else if (dir == Q6ASM_DAI_TX) > > > dai_drv->playback = empty_stream; > > > > > > - if (of_property_read_bool(node, "is-compress-dai")) > > > - dai_drv->compress_new = snd_soc_new_compress; > > > } > > > > > > return 0; > > > > > > --------------------------->cut<--------------------------------- > > > > > > Thanks, > > > srini > > > > > > > all the routing mixers still exist for them. They will just result in > > > > configurations that are not usable in any way. IMO the only thing we > > > > gain by restricting the FE DAIs is that the available mixers no longer > > > > match possible configurations. > > > > > > > > Before this patch set I used a slightly different approach in my device > > > > tree for MSM8916: I kept all FE DAIs bi-directional, and added DAI links > > > > for all of them. This means that I actually had 8 bi-directional PCM > > > > devices in userspace. > > > > > > > > I didn't use all of them - my ALSA UCM configuration only uses > > > > MultiMedia1 for playback and MultiMedia2 for capture. > > > > However, some other userspace (let's say Android) could have chosen > > > > different FE DAIs for whatever reason. We have the overhead for the > > > > routing matrix anyway, so we might as well expose it in my opinion. > > > > > > > > My question is: In what way are the FE DAIs really board-specific? > > > > > > > > If we expose only some FE DAIs with intended usage per board, > > > > e.g. MultiMedia1 for HDMI, MultiMedia2 for slimbus playback, > > > > MultiMedia3 for slimbus capture, > > > > I could almost argue that we don't need DPCM at all. > > > > The FE DAIs are always going to be used for the same backend anyway. > > > > > > > > This is a bit exaggerated - for example if you have a single compress > > > > DAI per board you probably intend to use it for both HDMI/slimbus. > > > > But this is the feeling I get if we configure the FE DAIs separately > > > > for each board. > > > > > > > > I wonder if we should leave configuration of the FE DAIs up to userspace > > > > (e.g. ALSA UCM), and expose the same full set of FE DAIs for each board. > > > > > > > > I think this is mostly a matter of convention for configuring FE DAIs > > > > in the device tree - I have some ideas how to make that work > > > > with the existing device tree bindings and for compressed DAIs. > > > > But this mail is already long enough as-is. ;) > > > > > > > > I also don't mind if we keep everything as-is > > > > - I just wanted to share what I have been thinking about. > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > > > Thanks for reading! ;) > > > > Stephan > > > > > > > > > Originally issue was reported by Vinod Koul > > > > > > > > > > Srinivas Kandagatla (2): > > > > > ASoC: qdsp6: q6asm-dai: only enable dais from device tree > > > > > ASoC: qdsp6: q6routing: remove default routing > > > > > > > > > > sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6asm-dai.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++------- > > > > > sound/soc/qcom/qdsp6/q6routing.c | 19 ------------------- > > > > > 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > 2.21.0 > > > > >