Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] ASoC: Intel: Add period size constraint on strago board

[Pierre-Louis Bossart]

On 8/3/20 8:00 AM, Lu, Brent wrote:
> > > > Again, is this fixed 240 is a must?  Or is this also an alignment issue?
> > > Hi Takashi,
> > >
> > > I think it's a must for Chromebooks. Google found this value works
> > > best with their CRAS server running on their BSW products. They
> > > offered this patch for their own Chromebooks.
> >
> > Hrm, but it's likely a worse choice on other sound backends.
> >
> > Please double-check whether this fixed small period is a must, or it's an
> > alignment issue.
> Hi Takashi,
>
> I've double checked with google. It's a must for Chromebooks due to low
> latency use case.

I wonder if there's a misunderstanding here?

I believe Takashi's question was "is this a must to ONLY accept 240 
samples for the period size", there was no pushback on the value itself. 
Are those boards broken with e.g. 960 samples?