Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 14 Jun 2022 09:15:48 +0000
From:   Charles Keepax <ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com>
To:     Samuel Holland <samuel@sholland.org>
CC:     <broonie@kernel.org>, <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>, <wens@csie.org>,
        <jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>, <linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
        <linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev>, <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
        <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>, <patches@opensource.cirrus.com>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ASoC: sun8i-codec: Partial revert to fix clock
 specifiers
Message-ID: <20220614091548.GC38351@ediswmail.ad.cirrus.com>
References: <20220613161552.481337-1-ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com>
 <9e105410-94d5-1801-8919-af8c0cef4de1@sholland.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <9e105410-94d5-1801-8919-af8c0cef4de1@sholland.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 01:39:20AM -0500, Samuel Holland wrote:
> Hi Charles,
> 
> On 6/13/22 11:15 AM, Charles Keepax wrote:
> > Recent updates accidentally updated the clock producer/consumer
> > specifiers on this device as part of refactoring the CPU side of the DAI
> > links. However, this device sits on the CODEC side and shouldn't have
> > been updated. Partially revert the changes keeping the switch to the new
> > clock terminology but going back to the CODEC defines.
> > 
> > Fixes: 7cc3965fde74 ("ASoC: sunxi: Update to use set_fmt_new callback")
> > Reported-by: Samuel Holland <samuel@sholland.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Charles Keepax <ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Samuel Holland <samuel@sholland.org>
> Tested-by: Samuel Holland <samuel@sholland.org>
> 
> Thanks for the quick follow-up, and sorry for the confusion my earlier comment
> caused. I verified that sound is broken (loud static) on a Pine A64-LTS board
> with for-next, and is fixed by this patch.

Not at all man, thank you for spotting my foolish mistake. Glad
we got it fixed up for you, and thank you for testing it.

Thanks,
Charles