Re: [PATCH 00/29] staging: bcm2835-audio: Cleanups and fixes

[Takashi Iwai]

On Sat, 08 Sep 2018 15:18:10 +0200,
Stefan Wahren wrote:
> 
> Hi Takashi,
> 
> > Takashi Iwai <tiwai@xxxxxxx> hat am 4. September 2018 um 17:58 geschrieben:
> > 
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > since I had an opportunity to play with RPi3B+ recently, I took a look
> > at the existing bcm2835-audio driver code and was amused very much :)
> > 
> > So here is the result, a cleanup and fix patch series.
> > 
> > Most of the patches are trivial cleanups, just brushing up, removing
> > many redundant and buggy codes, as well as code simplifications.
> > 
> > A big functional change is that now it uses non-atomic PCM ops, so
> > that we can kill the ugly workqueue usages.  Also, the resource
> > management was simplified.
> 
> first of all, thank you very much for this series.
> 
> Eric has no time as maintainer, so i will try to give you some feedback (beware of very little audio driver knowledge).
> 
> I functionally tested your patch series on a Raspberry Pi 1 B (bcm2835_defconfig), so this whole series is at least:
> 
> Tested-by: Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@xxxxxxxx>

OK, thanks, I'll put to my series in case of resubmission.
Meanwhile I'll keep the series in topic/vc04 branch of sound.git
tree.

> Unfortunately there is still an corruption issue with underlying vchiq and multi_v7_defconfig, so no wider tests.

What is this corruption issue?

> I don't know if you tested this series on a Raspberry Pi. Maybe you have some specific scenarios, which should be tested.

I have only a RPi3B+, and that's all what I've tested.
It'd be great if the patch series could be tested in a wider range of
models, of course.

The patches are only about cleanups.  They corrected the bad usages of
audio APIs and its design, but basically I haven't touched the basic
functionality intentionally at all.  So the behavior should be kept as
before.

(Actually it'd be better to revisit the design later, especially about
the multi-cards option and the PCM route mixer control, but I left as
is for compatibility reason for now.)

> As a reviewer i have some suggestions, but only trivia. I don't know if it's a problem that this series hasn't been send to devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

No, it's just because that address isn't found in MAINTAINERS file.
If it should go through it, please correct the entry at first :)


Thanks!

Takashi