In capture, there is chance that hw_ptr reported at IRQ is
a little smaller than period_size due to internal AFE buffer.
In the case of ping-pong buffer:
|xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx--|-----------------------------|
hw_ptr < period_size
This available buffer will not be read since its size is smaller than
avail_min (which is period_size by default), and read thread continues
to sleep. If the next hw_ptr is just a little larger than buffer_size,
overrun occurs. One more period can hold the possible unread buffer.
Signed-off-by: Koro Chen <redacted>
---
sound/soc/mediatek/mtk-afe-pcm.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
Any suggestion for this patch?
On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 14:51 +0800, Koro Chen wrote:
quoted hunk
In capture, there is chance that hw_ptr reported at IRQ is
a little smaller than period_size due to internal AFE buffer.
In the case of ping-pong buffer:
|xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx--|-----------------------------|
hw_ptr < period_size
This available buffer will not be read since its size is smaller than
avail_min (which is period_size by default), and read thread continues
to sleep. If the next hw_ptr is just a little larger than buffer_size,
overrun occurs. One more period can hold the possible unread buffer.
Signed-off-by: Koro Chen <redacted>
---
sound/soc/mediatek/mtk-afe-pcm.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> Date: 2015-09-23 16:14:03
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 06:03:19PM +0800, Koro Chen wrote:
Any suggestion for this patch?
On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 14:51 +0800, Koro Chen wrote:
quoted
In capture, there is chance that hw_ptr reported at IRQ is
a little smaller than period_size due to internal AFE buffer.
In the case of ping-pong buffer:
Please don't top post or send content free pings. I'm not entirely sure
what you're asking for here - the patch has been applied, what further
suggestions were you looking for?
On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 09:12 -0700, Mark Brown wrote:
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 06:03:19PM +0800, Koro Chen wrote:
quoted
Any suggestion for this patch?
On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 14:51 +0800, Koro Chen wrote:
quoted
In capture, there is chance that hw_ptr reported at IRQ is
a little smaller than period_size due to internal AFE buffer.
In the case of ping-pong buffer:
Please don't top post or send content free pings. I'm not entirely sure
what you're asking for here - the patch has been applied, what further
suggestions were you looking for?
I am sorry about the top posting ping... will never do this again.
OK thank you, now I see the patch is already in the tree, but I am sure
I didn't get the mail titled "Applied xxx to the asoc tree", so I didn't
know the patch status. Maybe something was wrong with the mail system?
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> Date: 2015-09-24 17:13:05
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 09:39:49AM +0800, Koro Chen wrote:
OK thank you, now I see the patch is already in the tree, but I am sure
I didn't get the mail titled "Applied xxx to the asoc tree", so I didn't
know the patch status. Maybe something was wrong with the mail system?
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:11:53AM -0700, Mark Brown wrote:
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 09:39:49AM +0800, Koro Chen wrote:
quoted
OK thank you, now I see the patch is already in the tree, but I am sure
I didn't get the mail titled "Applied xxx to the asoc tree", so I didn't
know the patch status. Maybe something was wrong with the mail system?
Possibly your mail system flagged it as spam?
I didn't receive it either and it doesn't seem to be in the archives.
Sascha
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |