[Intel-gfx] [alsa-devel] [RFC] set up an sync channel between audio and display driver (i.e. ALSA and DRM)

[Daniel Vetter]

On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 02:59:56PM +0000, Lin, Mengdong wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Vetter, Daniel
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 11:08 PM
> > 
> > On 20/05/2014 16:57, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 04:45:56PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > >> >On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Imre Deak<imre.deak at intel.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>> > >On Tue, 2014-05-20 at 05:52 +0300, Lin, Mengdong wrote:
> > >>>> > >>This RFC is based on previous discussion to set up a generic
> > >>>> > >>communication channel between display and audio driver and an
> > >>>> > >>internal design of Intel MCG/VPG HDMI audio driver. It's still
> > >>>> > >>an initial draft and your advice would be appreciated to
> > >>>> > >>improve the design.
> > >>>> > >>
> > >>>> > >>The basic idea is to create a new avsink module and let both
> > >>>> > >>drm and alsa depend on it.
> > >>>> > >>This new module provides a framework and APIs for
> > >>>> > >>synchronization between the display and audio driver.
> > >>>> > >>
> > >>>> > >>1. Display/Audio Client
> > >>>> > >>
> > >>>> > >>The avsink core provides APIs to create, register and lookup a
> > >>>> > >>display/audio client.
> > >>>> > >>A specific display driver (eg. i915) or audio driver (eg.
> > >>>> > >>HD-Audio
> > >>>> > >>driver) can create a client, add some resources objects (shared
> > >>>> > >>power wells, display outputs, and audio inputs, register ops)
> > >>>> > >>to the client, and then register this client to avisink core.
> > >>>> > >>The peer driver can look up a registered client by a name or
> > >>>> > >>type, or both. If a client gives a valid peer client name on
> > >>>> > >>registration, avsink core will bind the two clients as peer for
> > >>>> > >>each other. And we expect a display client and an audio client
> > >>>> > >>to be peers for each other in a system.
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > >One problem we have at the moment is the order of calling the
> > >>> > >system suspend/resume handlers of the display driver wrt. that of
> > >>> > >the audio driver. Since the power well control is part of the
> > >>> > >display HW block, we need to run the display driver's resume
> > >>> > >handler first, initialize the HW, and only then let the audio
> > >>> > >driver's resume handler run. For similar reasons we have to call
> > >>> > >the audio suspend handler first and only then the display driver
> > >>> > >resume handler. Currently we solve this using the display
> > >>> > >driver's late/early suspend/resume hooks, but we'd need a more robust
> > solution.
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > >This seems to be a similar issue to the load time ordering
> > >>> > >problem that you describe later. Having a real device for avsync
> > >>> > >that would be a child of the display device would solve the
> > >>> > >ordering issue in both cases. I admit I haven't looked into it if
> > >>> > >this is feasible, but I would like to see some solution to this as part of
> > the plan.
> > >> >
> > >> >Yeah, this is a big reason why I want real devices - we have piles
> > >> >of infrastructure to solve these ordering issues as soon as there's
> > >> >a struct device around. If we don't use that, we need to reinvent
> > >> >all those wheels ourselves.
> > > To make the driver core's magic work I think you'd need to find a way
> > > to reparent the audio device under the display device. Presumably they
> > > come from two different parts of the device tree (two different PCI
> > > devices I would guess for Intel, two different platform devices on
> > > SoCs). Changing the parent after a device has been registered doesn't
> > > work as far as I know. But even assuming that would work, I have
> > > trouble imagining what the implications would be on the rest of the driver
> > model.
> > >
> > > I faced similar problems with the Tegra DRM driver, and the only way I
> > > can see to make this kind of interaction between devices work is by
> > > tacking on an extra layer outside the core driver model.
> 
> > That's why we need a new avsink device which is a proper child of the gfx
> > device, and the audio driver needs to use the componentized device
> > framework so that the suspend/resume ordering works correctly. Or at least
> > that's been my idea, might be we have some small gaps here and there.
> > -Daniel
> 
> Hi Daniel,
> 
> Would you please share more info about your idea?
> 
> - What would be an avsink device represent here? 
>  E.g. on Intel platforms, will the whole display device have a child
>  avsink device or multiple avsink devices for each DDI port?

My idea would be to have one for each output pipe (i.e. the link between
audio and gfx), not one per ddi. Gfx driver would then let audio know when
a screen is connected and which one (e.g. exact model serial from edid).
This is somewhat important for dp mst where there's no longer a fixed
relationship between audio pin and screen

> 
> - And for the relationship between audio driver and the avsink device,
> which would be the master and which would be the component?

1:1 for avsink:alsa pin (iirc it's called a pin, not sure about the name).
That way the audio driver has a clear point for getting at the eld and
similar information.

> In addition, the component framework does not touch PM now. 
> And introducing PM to the component framework seems not easy since there
> can be potential conflict caused by parent-child relationship of the
> involved devices.

Yeah, the entire PM situation seems to be a bit bad. It also looks like on
resume/suspend we still have problems, at least on the audio side since we
need to coordinate between 2 completel different underlying devices. But
at least with the parent->child relationship we have a guranatee that the
avsink won't be suspended after the gfx device is already off.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch