Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   "S.j. Wang" <shengjiu.wang@nxp.com>
To:     Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@gmail.com>,
        "broonie@kernel.org" <broonie@kernel.org>
CC:     "timur@kernel.org" <timur@kernel.org>,
        "Xiubo.Lee@gmail.com" <Xiubo.Lee@gmail.com>,
        "festevam@gmail.com" <festevam@gmail.com>,
        "alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>,
        "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl_esai: fix the channel swap issue after xrun
Thread-Topic: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl_esai: fix the channel swap issue after xrun
Thread-Index: AdURVzqGXKVFB9wWT1W2rJfIdiMqrw==
Date:   Thu, 23 May 2019 11:04:03 +0000
Message-ID: <VE1PR04MB6479FF8E1B55E9BE67E7B0ECE3010@VE1PR04MB6479.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: nxp.com does not designate
 permitted sender hosts)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 975836e6-1c92-43ec-e790-08d6df6e5e21
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 23 May 2019 11:04:03.7101
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 686ea1d3-bc2b-4c6f-a92c-d99c5c301635
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: shengjiu.wang@nxp.com
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: VE1PR04MB6383
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi

> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 09:53:42AM +0000, S.j. Wang wrote:
> > > > +     /*
> > > > +      * Add fifo reset here, because the regcache_sync will
> > > > +      * write one more data to ETDR.
> > > > +      * Which will cause channel shift.
> > >
> > > Sounds like a bug to me...should fix it first by marking the data
> > > registers as volatile.
> > >
> > The ETDR is a writable register, it is not volatile. Even we change it
> > to Volatile, I don't think we can't avoid this issue. for the
> > regcache_sync Just to write this register, it is correct behavior.
>=20
> Is that so? Quoting the comments of regcache_sync():
> "* regcache_sync - Sync the register cache with the hardware.
>  *
>  * @map: map to configure.
>  *
>  * Any registers that should not be synced should be marked as
>  * volatile."
>=20
> If regcache_sync() does sync volatile registers too as you said, I don't =
mind
> having this FIFO reset WAR for now, though I think this mismatch between
> the comments and the actual behavior then should get people's attention.
>=20
> Thank you

ETDR is not volatile,  if we mark it is volatile, is it correct?

Bets regards
Wang shengjiu