Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] ASoC: Intel: Add period size constraint on strago board | From | Pierre-Louis Bossart <> | Date | Mon, 3 Aug 2020 10:13:39 -0500 |
| |
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?
| |