From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.223.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C7A04E0B67; Fri, 9 Oct 2026 13:26:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.131 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791552390; cv=none; b=tlMY0IFARTwOprCt2rB5h/TSAqmTGPo1dF0Wh5iUEj8QmbuH8u4A2S/l/EMtMn29hptX6PRqlc5g/rqYyrYn6PNjVyUmUi0EZUlwoLyvw/9oAd9adVcpai2oqbZXrzqoMQMiO6gXqkNi3YzuFPvxMqMGOuf3HWEjFZNp2ipcHm8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791552390; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Qv7ujzDmq4OGtWPiit/kn5nP9RXKJM4A0D/BbUGoVlU=; h=Date:Message-ID:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=t7hUnfuPBlFxgWOsqfpuRIUKnzRMckMcSuGKsDQ5D+XaXJWojCEfUuVB0D5MnTX4ebYNQUbBqY/VHWhNQutJrRWn959mBk3UU/rvolaudqb7O/tz/Nr7Z/0WPAjWVCu3y6+0/HkTaJxzi+sqncXBuNCCCDlxQbvRfBmBJXFrpr4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.de; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.131 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.de Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (unknown [10.150.64.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A1651F7CB; Fri, 9 Oct 2026 13:26:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp-out2.suse.de; none Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E03A1326D; Fri, 9 Oct 2026 13:26:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id TwCZBYPryGp6XgAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Fri, 09 Oct 2026 13:26:27 +0000 Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2026 15:26:26 +0200 Message-ID: <87mrsn3szh.wl-tiwai@suse.de> From: Takashi Iwai To: d@zerovolt.org Cc: Jaroslav Kysela , Takashi Iwai , linux-sound@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] ALSA: usb-audio: Add feedback snap quirk for Mayflower ARC AMP In-Reply-To: <20261009-mayflower-fb-v1-1-a84e82e05ac9@zerovolt.org> References: <20261009-mayflower-fb-v1-1-a84e82e05ac9@zerovolt.org> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/30.2 Mule/6.0 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=Unknown lua; unknown reason X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Level: X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=Unknown lua; unknown reason X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.00 / 50.00] X-Spam-Score: 0.00 On Fri, 09 Oct 2026 13:44:53 +0200, Dimitri Wegner via B4 Relay wrote: > > From: Dimitri Wegner > > The Mayflower ARC AMP DAC (USB ID 0493:4170, MAG Technology front-end) > at times gets stuck reporting feedback of nominal+1 sample/frame (97 > instead of 96 at 96 kHz) and does not recover. The driver follows this > feedback, and audible pops occur every 1-2s until the stream is > restarted. > > Add a quirk for this device that ignores feedback values more than > 1/128 (~0.8%) away from nominal and uses the nominal rate instead. > Normal feedback corrections are far smaller than that and pass > through unchanged. Other devices are not affected. > > Signed-off-by: Dimitri Wegner > --- > Tested on this DAC at 96 kHz for ~10 weeks on kernels 7.1 and 7.2. > The pops no longer occur. The quirk triggered ~680 times over that > period, always with feedback 0x61.0000 against nominal 0x60.0000. OK, so I assume that dev_warn_ratelimited() isn't too annoying, then. Applied to for-next branch now. Thanks. Takashi