On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 01:10:19PM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote:

On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 11:43 AM Nicolin Chen [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 10:41:55AM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote:

quoted

asrc_format is more inteligent variable, which is align
with the alsa definition snd_pcm_format_t.

Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang <redacted>
---
 sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c     | 23 +++++++++++------------
 sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.h     |  4 ++--
 sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc_dma.c |  2 +-
 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c
index 0dcebc24c312..2b6a1643573c 100644
--- a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c
+++ b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c

quoted

@@ -600,11 +599,6 @@ static int fsl_asrc_dai_hw_params(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream,

      pair->config = &config;

-     if (asrc_priv->asrc_width == 16)
-             format = SNDRV_PCM_FORMAT_S16_LE;
-     else
-             format = SNDRV_PCM_FORMAT_S24_LE;

It feels better to me that we have format settings in hw_params().

Why not let fsl_easrc align with this? Any reason that I'm missing?

because the asrc_width is not formal,  in the future we can direct

Hmm..that's our DT binding. And I don't feel it is a problem
to be ASoC irrelative.

input the format from the dts. format involve the info about width.

Is there such any formal ASoC binding? I don't see those PCM
formats under include/dt-bindings/ folder. How are we going
to involve those formats in DT?