ASoC: soc-pcm: add dpcm_runtime_setup_fe()
authorKuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com>
Mon, 22 Feb 2021 00:47:26 +0000 (09:47 +0900)
committerMark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Wed, 10 Mar 2021 13:06:46 +0000 (13:06 +0000)
commit5f53898af1a2bf753f111ec1c7ed668fe6557b76
treececba03cb233d66c4d09b1d3ef64d208842bbb8c
parent7f4a763642cc8d5f49e64a3611de8f62102c9d31
ASoC: soc-pcm: add dpcm_runtime_setup_fe()

dpcm_fe_dai_startup() (= A) calls dpcm_set_fe_runtime() (= B) to setup
DPCM runtime. From *naming point of view*, it sounds like setup function
for FE.

(A) static int dpcm_fe_dai_startup(...)
{
...
(B) dpcm_set_fe_runtime(...);
...
}

But in dpcm_set_fe_runtime() (= B),
It  setups FE by for_each loop (= X),
and setups BE by dpcm_runtime_merge_xxx() (= Y).

(B) static void dpcm_set_fe_runtime(...)
{
...
 ^ for_each_rtd_cpu_dais(...) {
 | ...
(X) soc_pcm_hw_update_rate(...);
 | soc_pcm_hw_update_chan(...);
 | soc_pcm_hw_update_format(...);
 v }

 ^ dpcm_runtime_merge_format(...);
(Y) dpcm_runtime_merge_chan(...);
 v dpcm_runtime_merge_rate(...);
}

These means that the function which is called as xxx_fe_xxx()
is setups both FE and BE. This is confusable and can be hot bed for bug.

To tidyup it, as 1st step, this patch adds new dpcm_runtime_setup_fe()
for (X).

Signed-off-by: Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/87pn0tvsgx.wl-kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com
Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
sound/soc/soc-pcm.c