lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Aug]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 2/2] ASoC: Intel: Add period size constraint on strago board
On Mon, 03 Aug 2020 18:45:29 +0200,
Lu, Brent wrote:
>
> > > 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?
>
> I've added google people to discuss directly.
>
> Hi Yuhsuan,
> Would you explain why CRAS needs to use such short period size? Thanks.

For avoid further misunderstanding: it's fine that CRAS *uses* such a
short period. It's often required for achieving a short latency.

However, the question is whether the driver can set *only* this value
for making it working. IOW, if we don't have this constraint, what
actually happens? If the driver gives the period size alignment,
wouldn't CRAS choose 240?


Takashi

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-08-03 18:57    [W:0.167 / U:0.360 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site