[REGRESSION] Re: [PATCH v1] ASoC: rockchip: i2s_tdm: Re-add the set_sysclk callback
From: "Luca Ceresoli" <luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com>
Date: 2026-02-10 09:54:12
Also in:
linux-rockchip, linux-sound, lkml
Hello Detlev, On Fri Jan 17, 2025 at 5:31 PM CET, Detlev Casanova wrote:
In commit
9e2ab4b18ebd ("ASoC: rockchip: i2s-tdm: Fix inaccurate sampling rates"),
the set_sysclk callback was removed as considered unused as the mclk rate
can be set in the hw_params callback.
The difference between hw_params and set_sysclk is that the former is
called with the audio sampling rate set in the params (e.g.: 48000 Hz)
while the latter is called with a clock rate already computed with
sampling_rate * mclk-fs (e.g.: 48000 * 256)
For HDMI audio using the Rockchip I2S TDM driver, the mclk-fs value must
be set to 128 instead of the default 256, and that value is set in the
device tree at the machine driver level (like a simple-audio-card
compatible node).
Therefore, the i2s_tdm driver has no idea that another mclk-fs value can
be configured and simply computes the mclk rate in the hw_params callback
with DEFAULT_MCLK_FS * params_rate(params), which is wrong for HDMI
audio.
Re-add the set_sysclk callback so that the mclk rate is computed by the
machine driver which has the correct mclk-fs value set in its device tree
node.I'm afraid I just found this commit breaks audio capture on the RK3308. Using 'arecord -Vmono -d 2 -c 8 -f S16_LE -r 96000 /dev/null' I get: rockchip-i2s-tdm ff320000.i2s: ASoC error (-22): at snd_soc_dai_hw_params() on ff320000.i2s ff320000.i2s-rk3308-hifi: ASoC error (-22): at __soc_pcm_hw_params() on ff320000.i2s-rk3308-hifi Tested on: * Radxa Rock Pi S * Upstream kernel * arm64 defconfig Tested kernel versions: * v6.12 works * 5323186e2e8d (this commit) fails * 5323186e2e8d^ works * 21cfbeae7d7c (same patch on stable/linux-6.12.y) fails * 21cfbeae7d7c^ works * v6.19 fails * v6.19 + 'git revert 5323186e2e8d' works I don't have more information at the moment.
Fixes: 9e2ab4b18ebd ("ASoC: rockchip: i2s-tdm: Fix inaccurate sampling rates")I'm the author of commit 9e2ab4b18ebd mentioned in the 'Fixes:' tag, so it would have been good to Cc me. I would have had the option of testing your patch and this regression could have been solved before getting in mainline. I think b4 does it automatically (and perhaps get_maintainers with appropriate flags). Luca -- Luca Ceresoli, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com