[RFC,0/2] wcd937x codec fixes

Message

Alexey Klimov Oct. 22, 2024, 3:31 a.m. UTC

This sent as RFC because of the following:

- regarding the LO switch patch. I've got info about that from two persons
independently hence not sure what tags to put there and who should be
the author. Please let me know if that needs to be corrected.

- the wcd937x pdm watchdog is a problem for audio playback and needs to be
fixed. The minimal fix would be to at least increase timeout value but
it will still trigger in case of plenty of dbg messages or other
delay-generating things. Unfortunately, I can't test HPHL/R outputs hence
the patch is only for AUX. The other options would be introducing
module parameter for debugging and using HOLD_OFF bit for that or
adding Kconfig option.

Alexey Klimov (2):
  ASoC: codecs: wcd937x: add missing LO Switch control
  ASoC: codecs: wcd937x: relax the AUX PDM watchdog

 sound/soc/codecs/wcd937x.c | 12 ++++++++++--
 sound/soc/codecs/wcd937x.h |  4 ++++
 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Comments

Mark Brown Oct. 22, 2024, 11:21 p.m. UTC | #1

On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 04:31:29AM +0100, Alexey Klimov wrote:
> This sent as RFC because of the following:
> 
> - regarding the LO switch patch. I've got info about that from two persons
> independently hence not sure what tags to put there and who should be
> the author. Please let me know if that needs to be corrected.

The tags are fine there.

Just as a general thing if two changes aren't directly related and don't
overlap at all it's usually better to send them separately to avoid
creating spurious dependencies which can slow down getting things
reviewed and merged.

Mark Brown Oct. 29, 2024, 8:35 p.m. UTC | #2

On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 04:31:29 +0100, Alexey Klimov wrote:
> This sent as RFC because of the following:
> 
> - regarding the LO switch patch. I've got info about that from two persons
> independently hence not sure what tags to put there and who should be
> the author. Please let me know if that needs to be corrected.
> 
> - the wcd937x pdm watchdog is a problem for audio playback and needs to be
> fixed. The minimal fix would be to at least increase timeout value but
> it will still trigger in case of plenty of dbg messages or other
> delay-generating things. Unfortunately, I can't test HPHL/R outputs hence
> the patch is only for AUX. The other options would be introducing
> module parameter for debugging and using HOLD_OFF bit for that or
> adding Kconfig option.
> 
> [...]

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/sound.git for-next

Thanks!

[1/2] ASoC: codecs: wcd937x: add missing LO Switch control
      commit: 041db4bbe04e8e0b48350b3bbbd9a799794d5c1e
[2/2] ASoC: codecs: wcd937x: relax the AUX PDM watchdog
      commit: 107a5c853eef5336a9846e7dd2f9184b6e3c07c7

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark

Alexey Klimov Nov. 1, 2024, 1:33 p.m. UTC | #3

Hi Mark,

On Wed Oct 23, 2024 at 12:21 AM BST, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 04:31:29AM +0100, Alexey Klimov wrote:
> > This sent as RFC because of the following:
> > 
> > - regarding the LO switch patch. I've got info about that from two persons
> > independently hence not sure what tags to put there and who should be
> > the author. Please let me know if that needs to be corrected.
>
> The tags are fine there.
>
> Just as a general thing if two changes aren't directly related and don't
> overlap at all it's usually better to send them separately to avoid
> creating spurious dependencies which can slow down getting things
> reviewed and merged.

Thank you. Noted. Yes, they are technically independent. They were
somehow connected in my head, something like "both are needed to have
working audio with lesser troubles". I'll try to keep not related and
not overlapping things separated.

Best regards,
Alexey