From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Brent Lu <brent.lu@intel.com>
Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org,
Support Opensource <support.opensource@diasemi.com>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: da7219: remove SRM lock check retry
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2019 13:57:17 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191203135717.GH1998@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1575358265-17905-1-git-send-email-brent.lu@intel.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1076 bytes --]
On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 03:31:05PM +0800, Brent Lu wrote:
> For platforms not able to provide WCLK in the PREPARED runtime state, it
> takes 400ms for codec driver to print the message "SRM failed to lock" in
> the da7219_dai_event() function which is called when DAPM widgets are
> powering up. The latency penalty to audio input/output is too much so the
> retry (8 times) and delay (50ms each retry) are removed.
> Another reason is current Cold output latency requirement in Android CDD is
> 500ms but will be reduced to 200ms for 2021 platforms. With the 400ms
> latency it would be difficult to pass the Android CTS test.
Adam pointed out some specific problems this causes here but at a
higher level this commit message isn't great since it just says
"I don't like these delays so I made them shorter" which doesn't
really explain what the delays are doing or why it's OK to make
them shorter - there are plenty of audio devices which require
longer ramp times than people would like out there but there's
usually good solid reasons why the delays have to be there.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-03 13:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-03 7:31 Brent Lu
2019-12-03 9:46 ` Adam Thomson
2019-12-03 10:32 ` Lu, Brent
2019-12-03 10:57 ` Adam Thomson
2019-12-03 14:36 ` Lu, Brent
2019-12-03 14:57 ` Adam Thomson
2019-12-03 15:23 ` Lu, Brent
2019-12-03 17:15 ` Adam Thomson
2019-12-03 13:57 ` Mark Brown [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191203135717.GH1998@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=alsa-devel@alsa-project.org \
--cc=brent.lu@intel.com \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=perex@perex.cz \
--cc=support.opensource@diasemi.com \
--cc=tiwai@suse.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®