asihpi: add hwdep (experimental)

Add hpi ioctl via hwdep (experimental, disabled by default). Adjust sampleclock control to use new hpi apis.

---

diff -r 6def4892d3f5 pci/Kconfig
@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ config SND_ASIHPI
 	depends on SND && X86
 	select FW_LOADER
 	select SND_PCM
+	select SND_HWDEP
 	help
 	  Say 'Y' or 'M' to include support for AudioScience ASIxxxx soundcards.
 

*asihpi_control,
struct snd_kcontrol_new *snd_control)
{
snd_control->info = snd_asihpi_clkrate_info; snd_control->get = snd_asihpi_clkrate_get;
- snd_control->put = snd_asihpi_clkrate_put;
+ snd_control->access =
+ SNDRV_CTL_ELEM_ACCESS_VOLATILE | SNDRV_CTL_ELEM_ACCESS_READ;

asihpi_ctl_name(snd_control, asihpi_control, "Rate");
}
-
/*------------------------------------------------------------
Mixer
------------------------------------------------------------*/
@@ -2404,6 +2455,14 @@ static int __devinit snd_card_asihpi_mix
return err;
snd_asihpi_clkrate_new(&asihpi_control,
&snd_control);
+ err = snd_ctl_add(card,
+ snd_ctl_new1(&snd_control, asihpi));
+ if (err < 0)
+ return err;
+ if (asihpi->cc.has_local)
+ snd_asihpi_clklocal_new(&asihpi_control,
+ &snd_control);
+
break;
case HPI_CONTROL_CONNECTION: /* ignore these */
continue;
@@ -2510,6 +2569,55 @@ static void __devinit snd_asihpi_proc_in
}

/*------------------------------------------------------------
+ HWDEP
+ ------------------------------------------------------------*/ +
+static int snd_asihpi_hpi_open(struct snd_hwdep * hw, struct file *file) +{
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int snd_asihpi_hpi_release(struct snd_hwdep * hw, struct file *file) +{
+ return 0;
+}
+
+long asihpi_hpi_ioctl(struct file *file,
+ unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg);
+
+static int snd_asihpi_hpi_ioctl(struct snd_hwdep * hw, struct file *file,
+ unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
+{
+ return asihpi_hpi_ioctl(file, cmd, arg);
+}
+
+
+/* results in /dev/snd/hwC#D0 file for each card with index #
+ also /proc/asound/hwdep will contain '#-00: asihpi (HPI) for each card'
+*/
+int __devinit snd_asihpi_hpi_new(struct snd_card_asihpi *asihpi, int device,
+ struct snd_hwdep ** rhwdep)
+{
+ struct snd_hwdep *hw;
+ int err;
+
+ if (rhwdep)
+ *rhwdep = NULL;
+ err = snd_hwdep_new(asihpi->card, "HPI", device, &hw);
+ if (err < 0)
+ return err;
+ strcpy(hw->name, "asihpi (HPI)");
+ hw->iface = SNDRV_HWDEP_IFACE_LAST;
+ hw->ops.open = snd_asihpi_hpi_open;
+ hw->ops.ioctl = snd_asihpi_hpi_ioctl;
+ hw->ops.release = snd_asihpi_hpi_release;
+ hw->private_data = asihpi;
+ if (rhwdep)
+ *rhwdep = hw;
+ return 0;
+}
+
+/*------------------------------------------------------------
CARD
------------------------------------------------------------*/
int __devinit snd_asihpi_bind(struct hpi_adapter *hpi_card)
@@ -2602,10 +2710,13 @@ int __devinit snd_asihpi_bind(struct hpi
HPI_CONTROL_SAMPLECLOCK, &hControl);

if (!err)
- err = HPI_SampleClock_SetSampleRate(phSubSys,
+ err = HPI_SampleClock_SetLocalRate(phSubSys,
hControl, adapter_fs);

snd_asihpi_proc_init(asihpi);
+
+ if (enable_hpi_hwdep)
+ snd_asihpi_hpi_new(asihpi, 0, NULL);

if (asihpi->support_mmap)
strcpy(card->driver, "ASIHPI-MMAP");

Patch 2/5 is waiting moderator approval (its 90K)

At Thu, 06 Mar 2008 15:07:54 +1300,

Add my address to Cc at the next time so that I get patches directly.

thanks,

Takashi

I've emailed Jaroslav a number of times asking to up the limit but have as usual seen them disappear into the great perex email blackhole. By now I'm simply rejecting them, asking posters to contact Jaroslav themselves...

The limit's at 60K right now which has been too little for quite a few valid patches. I believe that upto now 200K should mostly do but haven't in fact seen anything being size-moderated which _wasn't_ valid list content -- the size moderation category seems fairly useless to start with therefore.

Rene.

At Thu, 06 Mar 2008 11:05:40 +0100,

Besides that, in general it's recommended to add relevent developers to Cc's if you post patches. Then patches reach directly to the developers and have more chances to get in more quickly and certainly.

Takashi

But note that there are a few subsystem maintainers who don't like this so it's worth looking at what other people submitting patches for the subsystem are doing.

At Thu, 6 Mar 2008 10:17:04 +0000,

Yeah there are always exceptions :) But, *in general*, Cc to developers is a good thing.

BTW, this doesn't mean that you don't send patches to ML. The patches should be sent to ML, and Cc to maintainers/developers.

Takashi