Re: [linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v13 05/14] ASoC: sun4i-codec: Merge sun4i_codec_left_mixer_controls and sun4i_codec_right_mixer_controls into sun4i_codec_mixer_controls.

[Danny Milosavljevic <dannym@scratchpost.org>]

Hi,

> > > -static const struct snd_kcontrol_new sun4i_codec_left_mixer_controls[] = {
> > > -       SOC_DAPM_SINGLE("Left DAC Playback Switch", SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL,
> > > -                       SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL_LDACLMIXS, 1, 0),
> > > -};
> > > -
> > > -static const struct snd_kcontrol_new sun4i_codec_right_mixer_controls[] = {
> > > -       SOC_DAPM_SINGLE("Right DAC Playback Switch", SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL,
> > > +static const struct snd_kcontrol_new sun4i_codec_mixer_controls[] = {
> > > +       SOC_DAPM_DOUBLE("DAC Playback Switch", SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL,
> > > +                       SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL_LDACLMIXS,
> > >                         SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL_RDACRMIXS, 1, 0),  
> > 
> > This changes the mixer control names exposed to userspace. While I think
> > consolidating mixer controls is nice, giving the user a less cluttered
> > view, I'm not sure about the changing a possible userspace ABI.
> > 
> > Maxime, ALSA and ASoC people, any comments about this?  

>Yeah, breaking userspace is definitely not ok.

Okay.  I can restore DAC Playback Switch as two different controls with the same
names as before.

Is the mixer itself (SND_SOC_DAPM_MIXER) - not talking about its controls -
exposed to userspace?

Because if not, I can still merge the left mixer and right mixer and just fix up
the control names for DAC Playback Switch to be the same as before, something
like this:

static const struct snd_kcontrol_new sun4i_codec_mixer_controls[] = {
        SOC_DAPM_SINGLE("Left Mixer Left DAC Playback Switch", // !!!
                        SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL,
                        SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL_LDACLMIXS, 1, 0),
        SOC_DAPM_SINGLE("Right Mixer Right DAC Playback Switch", // !!!
                        SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL,
                        SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL_RDACRMIXS, 1, 0),
        SOC_DAPM_SINGLE("Right Mixer Left DAC Playback Switch",
                        SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL,
                        SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL_LDACRMIXS, 1, 0),
        SOC_DAPM_DOUBLE("Line Playback Switch", SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL,
                        SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL_LLNS,
                        SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL_RLNS, 1, 0),
        SOC_DAPM_DOUBLE("FM Playback Switch", SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL,
                        SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL_LFMS,
                        SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL_RFMS, 1, 0),
        SOC_DAPM_DOUBLE("Mic1 Playback Switch", SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL,
                        SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL_MIC1LS,
                        SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL_MIC1RS, 1, 0),
        SOC_DAPM_DOUBLE("Mic2 Playback Switch", SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL,
                        SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL_MIC2LS,
                        SUN4I_CODEC_DAC_ACTL_MIC2RS, 1, 0),
};

static const struct snd_soc_dapm_widget sun4i_codec_codec_dapm_widgets[] = {
...
        SND_SOC_DAPM_MIXER("Left Mixer", SND_SOC_NOPM, 0, 0,
                           sun4i_codec_mixer_controls,
                           ARRAY_SIZE(sun4i_codec_mixer_controls)), // !!!
        SND_SOC_DAPM_MIXER("Right Mixer", SND_SOC_NOPM, 0, 0,
                           sun4i_codec_mixer_controls,
                           ARRAY_SIZE(sun4i_codec_mixer_controls)), // !!!
};

Would this be a good way?