Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-63484-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2024 13:10:24 +0100
Message-ID: <87plx0y37z.wl-tiwai@suse.de>
From: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
To: Wesley Cheng <quic_wcheng@quicinc.com>
Cc: <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>,
	<mathias.nyman@intel.com>,
	<perex@perex.cz>,
	<conor+dt@kernel.org>,
	<corbet@lwn.net>,
	<lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	<andersson@kernel.org>,
	<krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
	<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	<Thinh.Nguyen@synopsys.com>,
	<broonie@kernel.org>,
	<bgoswami@quicinc.com>,
	<tiwai@suse.com>,
	<robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	<konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-sound@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
	<alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 41/50] ASoC: Add SND kcontrol for fetching USB offload status
In-Reply-To: <20240213005422.3121-42-quic_wcheng@quicinc.com>
References: <20240213005422.3121-1-quic_wcheng@quicinc.com>
	<20240213005422.3121-42-quic_wcheng@quicinc.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/27.2 Mule/6.0
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 01:54:13 +0100,
Wesley Cheng wrote:
> 
> Add a kcontrol to the platform sound card to fetch the current offload
> status.  This can allow for userspace to ensure/check which USB SND
> resources are actually busy versus having to attempt opening the USB SND
> devices, which will result in an error if offloading is active.
> 
> An example of fetching the USB offloading status would look like:
> tinymix -D 0 get 'USB Offload Playback Route Status'
> -1, -1 (range -1->32) --> [Offload is idle]
> 
> tinymix -D 0 get 'USB Offload Playback Route Status'
> 1, 0 (range -1->32)  --> [Offload active on card#1 pcm#0]

Ah, I didn't notice until now that the second value is the PCM index.

> +static int snd_soc_usb_offload_status_info(struct snd_kcontrol *kcontrol,
> +			      struct snd_ctl_elem_info *uinfo)
> +{
> +	struct snd_soc_component *component = snd_kcontrol_chip(kcontrol);
> +	struct snd_soc_usb *ctx = snd_soc_find_usb_ctx(component->dev->of_node);
> +
> +	uinfo->type = SNDRV_CTL_ELEM_TYPE_INTEGER;
> +	uinfo->count = 2*ctx->num_supported_streams;
> +	uinfo->value.integer.min = -1;
> +	uinfo->value.integer.max = SNDRV_CARDS;

Then it's bogus to set SNDRV_CARDS as max.  The PCM index number is
independent from the card number.  In theory, it can be even more than
the card max (very unlikely, though).

Wouldn't it be more intuitive to provide two different controls, one
for card number and one for PCM index number?


thanks,

Takashi