Skip to contentSkip to conversation

ASoC: da7210: bugfix for head phone volume control

PATCH Applied Ashish Chavan 2 participants 3 messages Oct 12, 2011 – Oct 13, 2011

Subsystems (3)
lore
Share & tools
lore
#0 lore raw

PATCH 6/9 ASoC: da7210: bugfix for head phone volume control

This patch takes care of reserved bits of headphone volume register by using correct volume range.

Tested on Samsung SMDK6410 board with DA7210 evaluation board.

---
 sound/soc/codecs/da7210.c |   11 +++++++----
 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
sound/soc/codecs/da7210.c +7 -4
index 60f403b..eb12c82 100644
@@ -196,12 +196,15 @@
  * mute		: 0x10
  * reserved	: 0x00 - 0x0F
  *
- * ** FIXME **
- *
  * Reserved area are considered as "mute".
- * -> min = -79.5 dB
  */
-static const DECLARE_TLV_DB_SCALE(hp_out_tlv, -7950, 150, 1);
+static const unsigned int hp_out_tlv[] = {
+	TLV_DB_RANGE_HEAD(2),
+	0x0, 0x10, TLV_DB_SCALE_ITEM(TLV_DB_GAIN_MUTE, 0, 1),
+	/* -54 dB to +15 dB */
+	0x11, 0x3f, TLV_DB_SCALE_ITEM(-5400, 150, 0),
+};
+
 static const DECLARE_TLV_DB_SCALE(dac_gain_tlv, -7725, 75, 0);
 static const DECLARE_TLV_DB_SCALE(mic_vol_tlv, -600, 600, 0);
 static const DECLARE_TLV_DB_SCALE(aux2_vol_tlv, -600, 600, 0);
Signature · 1 line
1.7.1
#1 lore raw
Quoted 2 lines · Ashish Chavan

This patch takes care of reserved bits of headphone volume register by using correct volume range.

This doesn't apply, which is pretty surprising given that there's no obvious overlap at all with the rest of the code.

Quoted 1 line

Tested on Samsung SMDK6410 board with DA7210 evaluation board.

This really isn't useful information in a changelog, apart from anything else this isn't going to be a system that it's easy for other people to reproduce.

#2 lore raw
Quoted 6 lines · Mark Brown
Quoted 2 lines · Ashish Chavan

This patch takes care of reserved bits of headphone volume register by using correct volume range.

This doesn't apply, which is pretty surprising given that there's no obvious overlap at all with the rest of the code.

I guess this is mostly due to indirect dependence on [PATCH 1/9]. It applies after applying first patch.

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines

Tested on Samsung SMDK6410 board with DA7210 evaluation board.

This really isn't useful information in a changelog, apart from anything else this isn't going to be a system that it's easy for other people to reproduce.

OK, will remove redundant info.