Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] soundwire: add support for static port mapping | From | Pierre-Louis Bossart <> | Date | Thu, 21 Jan 2021 12:00:43 -0600 |
| |
On 1/21/21 9:41 AM, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: > > > On 21/01/2021 14:56, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: >> >> >>> Port allocations are something like this: >>> >>> RX: (Simple) >>> Port 1 -> HPH L/R >>> Port 2 -> CLASS H Amp >>> Port 3 -> COMP >>> Port 4 -> DSD. >>> >>> TX: (This get bit more complicated) >>> Port 1: PCM >>> Port 2: ADC 1 & 2 >>> Port 3: ADC 3 & 4 >>> Port 4: DMIC-0, DMIC-1, DIMC-2 , DMIC-3 and MBHC >>> Port 5: DMIC-4, DMIC-5, DMIC-6 and DMIC-7 >>> >>> We handle the port allocation dynamically based on mixer and dapm >>> widgets in my code! Also channel allocations are different for each >>> function! >> >> Sorry, I am not following here. What is dynamic here and use-case >> dependent? And is this a mapping on the master or the codec sides that >> you want to modify? > > [SLAVE]-------[MASTER] > NA-------------Port 1: PCM > Port 1---------Port 2: ADC 1 & 2 > Port 2---------Port 3: ADC 3 & 4 > Port 3---------Port 4: DMIC-0, DMIC-1, DIMC-2 , DMIC-3 and MBHC > Port 4---------Port 5: DMIC-4, DMIC-5, DMIC-6 and DMIC-7 > > > Mapping is still static however Number of ports selection and channel > mask will be dynamic here. > > > Example: for Headset MIC usecase we will be using Slv Port1, Slv Port3 > along with Mstr Port2 and Master Port4 > > Similarly for usecases like Digital MIC or other Analog MICs.
Sorry, I must be thick here, but in my experience the choice of Digital or analog mics is a hardware design level not a use-case one. Using ADC 1 & 2 at the same time as DMICs is very surprising to me. You'd have different sensitivities/performance, not sure how you would combine the results.
I also don't see how a headset mic can both use Analog and digital, unless we have a different definition of what a 'headset' is.
>>>> Does this help and can you align on what Intel started with? >>> >>> Firstly, This is where the issue comes, if we go with the >>> suggested(dai->id) solution, we would end up with a long list of >>> dai-links with different combinations of both inputs/output >>> connections and usecases. Again we have to deal with limited DSP >>> resources too! >>> >>> Secondly, The check [1] in stream.c will not allow more than one >>> master port config to be added to master runtime. Ex: RX Port 1, 2, 3 >>> is used for Headset Playback. >> >> I am confused here, we do have examples in existing codec drivers >> where we use multiple ports for a single stream, e.g. for IV feedback >> we use 2 ports. > > Is this on multi_link? which is why it might be working for you.
no, this is done at the codec driver level, which has no notion of multi-link. we pass a port_config as a array of 2.
> Currently we have below check in sdw_stream_add_master(). > > if (!bus->multi_link && stream->m_rt_count > 0) { > dev_err(bus->dev, "Multilink not supported, link %d\n", bus->link_id); > ret = -EINVAL; > goto unlock; > } > > If we have single master(like my case) and dai-links which have more > then one port will be calling sdw_stream_add_master() for each port, > so m_rt_count above check will fail for the second call!
if you use multiple ports in a given master for the same stream, you should have the m_rt_count == 1. That's a feature, not a bug.
A port is not a stream... You cannot call sdw_stream_add_master() for each port, that's not what the concept was. You allocate ONE master_rt per master, and that master_rt deals with one or more ports - your choice.
A 'stream' is an abstract data transport which can be split across multiple masters/sales and for each master/slave use multiple ports. When calling sdw_stream_add_master/slave, you need to provide a port_config/num_ports to state which ports will be used on that master/slave when using the stream. That's how we e.g. deal with 4ch streams that are handled by two ports on each side.
To up-level a bit, the notion of 'stream' is actually very very similar to the notion of dailink. And in fact, the 'stream' is actually created for Intel in the dailink .startup callback, so I am quite in the dark on what you are trying to accomplish.
| |