| Message ID | 4E5BA7BD.6000403@canonical.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On 08/29/2011 08:52 AM, David Henningsson wrote: > Upstream status for this patch is that Takashi went on vacation before > he commented on the patch, and might not return before kernel freeze. > > Anyway, it's needed for jack detection for HDMI to work. So I'd be happy > if we could apply this for Oneiric (the jack detection patches are > distro patches anyway), and then I'll have plenty of time to sort out > with Takashi what to do for P. > While the patch looks fine, its difficult for me to ascertain the risk of regression. Has this patch had widespread testing? It appears to have the possibility for widespread impact. Without some really warm fuzzies from you (and a little data to back your claim), I'm inclined to let this go through the normal upstream process. rtg
On 08/29/2011 06:08 PM, Tim Gardner wrote: > On 08/29/2011 08:52 AM, David Henningsson wrote: >> Upstream status for this patch is that Takashi went on vacation before >> he commented on the patch, and might not return before kernel freeze. >> >> Anyway, it's needed for jack detection for HDMI to work. So I'd be happy >> if we could apply this for Oneiric (the jack detection patches are >> distro patches anyway), and then I'll have plenty of time to sort out >> with Takashi what to do for P. >> > > While the patch looks fine, its difficult for me to ascertain the risk > of regression. Has this patch had widespread testing? It appears to have > the possibility for widespread impact.Without some really warm fuzzies > from you (and a little data to back your claim), I'm inclined to let > this go through the normal upstream process. I'm not sure exactly what "warm fuzzies" you need, but currently: * It has not had widespread testing. I could obviously test it on all machines I have here, something I should probably do anyway, but would that be enough for you? * The upstream version of this patch, for Linux 3.2 (which is slightly different, this is a backported version) has received review from Stephen Warren@Nvidia, who has recently refactored the HDMI audio driver. He believes the patch looks good, but was unsure if he wanted more reformatting of the string at the same time.
On 08/30/2011 12:21 AM, David Henningsson wrote: > On 08/29/2011 06:08 PM, Tim Gardner wrote: >> On 08/29/2011 08:52 AM, David Henningsson wrote: >>> Upstream status for this patch is that Takashi went on vacation before >>> he commented on the patch, and might not return before kernel freeze. >>> >>> Anyway, it's needed for jack detection for HDMI to work. So I'd be happy >>> if we could apply this for Oneiric (the jack detection patches are >>> distro patches anyway), and then I'll have plenty of time to sort out >>> with Takashi what to do for P. >>> >> >> While the patch looks fine, its difficult for me to ascertain the risk >> of regression. Has this patch had widespread testing? It appears to have >> the possibility for widespread impact.Without some really warm fuzzies >> from you (and a little data to back your claim), I'm inclined to let >> this go through the normal upstream process. > > I'm not sure exactly what "warm fuzzies" you need, but currently: > > * It has not had widespread testing. I could obviously test it on all > machines I have here, something I should probably do anyway, but would > that be enough for you? > > * The upstream version of this patch, for Linux 3.2 (which is slightly > different, this is a backported version) has received review from > Stephen Warren@Nvidia, who has recently refactored the HDMI audio > driver. He believes the patch looks good, but was unsure if he wanted > more reformatting of the string at the same time. > So, you're asking to have a patch applied that has general impact on all platforms with an HDMI port, which by your own admission has not had widespread testing, and has not been agreed to or fully reviewed by upstream maintainers. The kernel is in Beta freeze right now. What would your call be if you were in the same position? rtg
On 08/30/2011 03:48 PM, Tim Gardner wrote: > On 08/30/2011 12:21 AM, David Henningsson wrote: >> On 08/29/2011 06:08 PM, Tim Gardner wrote: >>> On 08/29/2011 08:52 AM, David Henningsson wrote: >>>> Upstream status for this patch is that Takashi went on vacation before >>>> he commented on the patch, and might not return before kernel freeze. >>>> >>>> Anyway, it's needed for jack detection for HDMI to work. So I'd be >>>> happy >>>> if we could apply this for Oneiric (the jack detection patches are >>>> distro patches anyway), and then I'll have plenty of time to sort out >>>> with Takashi what to do for P. >>>> >>> >>> While the patch looks fine, its difficult for me to ascertain the risk >>> of regression. Has this patch had widespread testing? It appears to have >>> the possibility for widespread impact.Without some really warm fuzzies >>> from you (and a little data to back your claim), I'm inclined to let >>> this go through the normal upstream process. >> >> I'm not sure exactly what "warm fuzzies" you need, but currently: >> >> * It has not had widespread testing. I could obviously test it on all >> machines I have here, something I should probably do anyway, but would >> that be enough for you? >> >> * The upstream version of this patch, for Linux 3.2 (which is slightly >> different, this is a backported version) has received review from >> Stephen Warren@Nvidia, who has recently refactored the HDMI audio >> driver. He believes the patch looks good, but was unsure if he wanted >> more reformatting of the string at the same time. >> > > So, you're asking to have a patch applied that has general impact on all > platforms with an HDMI port, which by your own admission has not had > widespread testing, and has not been agreed to or fully reviewed by > upstream maintainers. > > The kernel is in Beta freeze right now. What would your call be if you > were in the same position? If I were in the same position: First and foremost, I would start with a warm, welcoming and encouraging attitude towards patches. A patch sent here, means someone not only wants to improve Linux in general, but also cares in special for Ubuntu, and has taken the time and effort to backport a patch to suit Ubuntu's particular kernel version. In this case, the patch author is a Canonical employee so this is not surprising, but nevertheless, this is a really good thing and should be encouraged. With that positive attitude in mind, I would do a review. The review would, of course, take regression risk into account - a kernel bug can cause the system to fail in the most horrifying ways - but also weigh that against the possible positive outcomes of applying the patch, i e why it's needed in the first place. If I'm not qualified to make a review, I would find someone who is, to make the opinion for me. The review in this case would notice that it impacts most people with working HDMI audio which means both higher risk and gain. OTOH, the code path is simple, which means that successful testing on one machine would make it unlikely to fail on another. If I'm still unsure of regressions even after having done the review, I would make sure testing of the patch is done. If I have time, I do the testing myself, or if I don't, ask for someone to test it for me, but do what I can to help, e g by building a test kernel and provide instructions as of how to do the test. If testing with positive result is all that's needed before applying the patch, I would communicate that clearly, among with a deadline explaining when the testing must be completed.
On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 09:18 +0200, David Henningsson wrote: > On 08/30/2011 03:48 PM, Tim Gardner wrote: [...] > > So, you're asking to have a patch applied that has general impact on all > > platforms with an HDMI port, which by your own admission has not had > > widespread testing, and has not been agreed to or fully reviewed by > > upstream maintainers. > > > > The kernel is in Beta freeze right now. What would your call be if you > > were in the same position? > > If I were in the same position: > > First and foremost, I would start with a warm, welcoming and encouraging > attitude towards patches. A patch sent here, means someone not only > wants to improve Linux in general, but also cares in special for Ubuntu, > and has taken the time and effort to backport a patch to suit Ubuntu's > particular kernel version. In this case, the patch author is a Canonical > employee so this is not surprising, but nevertheless, this is a really > good thing and should be encouraged. Let me just start by saying that we really appreciate all the work that you've done with regards to the audio subsystem. Your interaction with upstream and the bug fixes you've provided for Ubuntu have been much appreciated and I encourage you to keep up the good work. > With that positive attitude in mind, I would do a review. The review > would, of course, take regression risk into account - a kernel bug can > cause the system to fail in the most horrifying ways - but also weigh > that against the possible positive outcomes of applying the patch, i e > why it's needed in the first place. If I'm not qualified to make a > review, I would find someone who is, to make the opinion for me. Because we do consider you one of our knowledge experts in the audio area, I believe Tim was wanting a bit more reassurance and confidence from you with regards to the patch. Having recognized the potential for widespread impact, I do feel he was doing his job as one of the maintainers of the Ubuntu kernel to make sure we're not introducing regressions, especially being so close to Beta for Oneiric. > The review in this case would notice that it impacts most people with > working HDMI audio which means both higher risk and gain. OTOH, the code > path is simple, which means that successful testing on one machine would > make it unlikely to fail on another. > > If I'm still unsure of regressions even after having done the review, I > would make sure testing of the patch is done. If I have time, I do the > testing myself, or if I don't, ask for someone to test it for me, but do > what I can to help, e g by building a test kernel and provide > instructions as of how to do the test. If testing with positive result > is all that's needed before applying the patch, I would communicate that > clearly, among with a deadline explaining when the testing must be > completed. I've built a test kernel with your patch applied and placed it at the following location: http://people.canonical.com/~ogasawara/diwic/ If you can, could you please test and confirm this resolves the issue at hand and also doesn't introduce any regressions on a few existing systems with working HDMI audio (whatever access to systems you have on hand would suffice). Please keep in mind that Oneiric Kernel Freeze is Thurs Sept 15, so if I could get your feedback before then I'd be happy to try and get this applied before we hit the freeze date. Thanks in advance, Leann
On 08/31/2011 11:35 PM, Leann Ogasawara wrote: > On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 09:18 +0200, David Henningsson wrote: >> On 08/30/2011 03:48 PM, Tim Gardner wrote: > [...] >>> So, you're asking to have a patch applied that has general impact on all >>> platforms with an HDMI port, which by your own admission has not had >>> widespread testing, and has not been agreed to or fully reviewed by >>> upstream maintainers. >>> >>> The kernel is in Beta freeze right now. What would your call be if you >>> were in the same position? >> >> If I were in the same position: >> >> First and foremost, I would start with a warm, welcoming and encouraging >> attitude towards patches. A patch sent here, means someone not only >> wants to improve Linux in general, but also cares in special for Ubuntu, >> and has taken the time and effort to backport a patch to suit Ubuntu's >> particular kernel version. In this case, the patch author is a Canonical >> employee so this is not surprising, but nevertheless, this is a really >> good thing and should be encouraged. > > Let me just start by saying that we really appreciate all the work that > you've done with regards to the audio subsystem. Your interaction with > upstream and the bug fixes you've provided for Ubuntu have been much > appreciated and I encourage you to keep up the good work. > >> With that positive attitude in mind, I would do a review. The review >> would, of course, take regression risk into account - a kernel bug can >> cause the system to fail in the most horrifying ways - but also weigh >> that against the possible positive outcomes of applying the patch, i e >> why it's needed in the first place. If I'm not qualified to make a >> review, I would find someone who is, to make the opinion for me. > > Because we do consider you one of our knowledge experts in the audio > area, I believe Tim was wanting a bit more reassurance and confidence > from you with regards to the patch. Having recognized the potential for > widespread impact, I do feel he was doing his job as one of the > maintainers of the Ubuntu kernel to make sure we're not introducing > regressions, especially being so close to Beta for Oneiric. > >> The review in this case would notice that it impacts most people with >> working HDMI audio which means both higher risk and gain. OTOH, the code >> path is simple, which means that successful testing on one machine would >> make it unlikely to fail on another. >> >> If I'm still unsure of regressions even after having done the review, I >> would make sure testing of the patch is done. If I have time, I do the >> testing myself, or if I don't, ask for someone to test it for me, but do >> what I can to help, e g by building a test kernel and provide >> instructions as of how to do the test. If testing with positive result >> is all that's needed before applying the patch, I would communicate that >> clearly, among with a deadline explaining when the testing must be >> completed. > > I've built a test kernel with your patch applied and placed it at the > following location: > > http://people.canonical.com/~ogasawara/diwic/ > > If you can, could you please test and confirm this resolves the issue at > hand and also doesn't introduce any regressions on a few existing > systems with working HDMI audio (whatever access to systems you have on > hand would suffice). Please keep in mind that Oneiric Kernel Freeze is > Thurs Sept 15, so if I could get your feedback before then I'd be happy > to try and get this applied before we hit the freeze date. Hi Leann and thank you for your kind words and clear instructions! :-) Here are the testing results (where 3.0.0-10 means your patched and built test kernel installed, and 3.0.0-9 is what comes with 11.10 beta 1) : Radeon HD 4200 series: 3.0.0-9, radeon driver: no jack input device, no working HDMI audio. 3.0.0-10, radeon driver: no jack input device, no working HDMI audio. 3.0.0-9, fglrx driver: no jack input device, working HDMI audio. 3.0.0-10, fglrx driver: no jack input device, working HDMI audio. Note: Since there is no jack input device, the code path is not run and my patch does not make any difference. Might look into that later (why there isn't a jack input device), but that is not on top of the priority list ATM. Intel Arrandale: 3.0.0-9: one jack input device "HDA Intel HDMI/DP" (plugin working, unplug does not work), working HDMI audio. 3.0.0-10: one jack input device "HDA Intel HDMI/DP,pcm=3" (plugin working but compiz crashed at one point, unplug does not work), working HDMI audio. Note: Patch working as jack input device name changes successfully. The compiz crash (reported as bug 839468) was a little strange, so I retried but could not reproduce the crash under either kernel. I don't think it has anything to do with the HDMI audio patch. Nvidia GT 430: 3.0.0-9, nouveau driver: four jack input devices "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP" (none of them working), no working HDMI audio on any of the four PCMs. 3.0.0-10, nouveau driver: four jack input devices "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP,pcm=3", "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP,pcm=7", "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP,pcm=8", "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP,pcm=9" (none of them working), no working HDMI audio on any of the four PCMs. 3.0.0-10, nvidia driver: four jack input devices "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP,pcm=3", "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP,pcm=7", "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP,pcm=8", "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP,pcm=9". The pcm=9 indicates working HDMI audio for plughw:NVidia,9 (or hdmi:NVidia,3). \o/ Note: I spent four hours trying to install nvidia binary driver before I succeeded (thanks to Sarvatt, tjaalton, and tseliot for helping out), and one more hour trying to install it under 3.0.0.9. Final conclusion: patch works as expected and no regressions found.
On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 17:21 +0200, David Henningsson wrote: > On 08/31/2011 11:35 PM, Leann Ogasawara wrote: > > On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 09:18 +0200, David Henningsson wrote: > >> On 08/30/2011 03:48 PM, Tim Gardner wrote: > > [...] > >>> So, you're asking to have a patch applied that has general impact on all > >>> platforms with an HDMI port, which by your own admission has not had > >>> widespread testing, and has not been agreed to or fully reviewed by > >>> upstream maintainers. > >>> > >>> The kernel is in Beta freeze right now. What would your call be if you > >>> were in the same position? > >> > >> If I were in the same position: > >> > >> First and foremost, I would start with a warm, welcoming and encouraging > >> attitude towards patches. A patch sent here, means someone not only > >> wants to improve Linux in general, but also cares in special for Ubuntu, > >> and has taken the time and effort to backport a patch to suit Ubuntu's > >> particular kernel version. In this case, the patch author is a Canonical > >> employee so this is not surprising, but nevertheless, this is a really > >> good thing and should be encouraged. > > > > Let me just start by saying that we really appreciate all the work that > > you've done with regards to the audio subsystem. Your interaction with > > upstream and the bug fixes you've provided for Ubuntu have been much > > appreciated and I encourage you to keep up the good work. > > > >> With that positive attitude in mind, I would do a review. The review > >> would, of course, take regression risk into account - a kernel bug can > >> cause the system to fail in the most horrifying ways - but also weigh > >> that against the possible positive outcomes of applying the patch, i e > >> why it's needed in the first place. If I'm not qualified to make a > >> review, I would find someone who is, to make the opinion for me. > > > > Because we do consider you one of our knowledge experts in the audio > > area, I believe Tim was wanting a bit more reassurance and confidence > > from you with regards to the patch. Having recognized the potential for > > widespread impact, I do feel he was doing his job as one of the > > maintainers of the Ubuntu kernel to make sure we're not introducing > > regressions, especially being so close to Beta for Oneiric. > > > >> The review in this case would notice that it impacts most people with > >> working HDMI audio which means both higher risk and gain. OTOH, the code > >> path is simple, which means that successful testing on one machine would > >> make it unlikely to fail on another. > >> > >> If I'm still unsure of regressions even after having done the review, I > >> would make sure testing of the patch is done. If I have time, I do the > >> testing myself, or if I don't, ask for someone to test it for me, but do > >> what I can to help, e g by building a test kernel and provide > >> instructions as of how to do the test. If testing with positive result > >> is all that's needed before applying the patch, I would communicate that > >> clearly, among with a deadline explaining when the testing must be > >> completed. > > > > I've built a test kernel with your patch applied and placed it at the > > following location: > > > > http://people.canonical.com/~ogasawara/diwic/ > > > > If you can, could you please test and confirm this resolves the issue at > > hand and also doesn't introduce any regressions on a few existing > > systems with working HDMI audio (whatever access to systems you have on > > hand would suffice). Please keep in mind that Oneiric Kernel Freeze is > > Thurs Sept 15, so if I could get your feedback before then I'd be happy > > to try and get this applied before we hit the freeze date. > > Hi Leann and thank you for your kind words and clear instructions! :-) > > Here are the testing results (where 3.0.0-10 means your patched and > built test kernel installed, and 3.0.0-9 is what comes with 11.10 beta 1) : > > Radeon HD 4200 series: > > 3.0.0-9, radeon driver: no jack input device, no working HDMI audio. > 3.0.0-10, radeon driver: no jack input device, no working HDMI audio. > 3.0.0-9, fglrx driver: no jack input device, working HDMI audio. > 3.0.0-10, fglrx driver: no jack input device, working HDMI audio. > > Note: Since there is no jack input device, the code path is not run and > my patch does not make any difference. Might look into that later (why > there isn't a jack input device), but that is not on top of the priority > list ATM. > > Intel Arrandale: > > 3.0.0-9: one jack input device "HDA Intel HDMI/DP" (plugin working, > unplug does not work), working HDMI audio. > 3.0.0-10: one jack input device "HDA Intel HDMI/DP,pcm=3" (plugin > working but compiz crashed at one point, unplug does not work), working > HDMI audio. > > Note: Patch working as jack input device name changes successfully. The > compiz crash (reported as bug 839468) was a little strange, so I retried > but could not reproduce the crash under either kernel. I don't think it > has anything to do with the HDMI audio patch. > > Nvidia GT 430: > > 3.0.0-9, nouveau driver: four jack input devices "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP" > (none of them working), no working HDMI audio on any of the four PCMs. > 3.0.0-10, nouveau driver: four jack input devices "HDA NVidia > HDMI/DP,pcm=3", "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP,pcm=7", "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP,pcm=8", > "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP,pcm=9" (none of them working), no working HDMI audio > on any of the four PCMs. > 3.0.0-10, nvidia driver: four jack input devices "HDA NVidia > HDMI/DP,pcm=3", "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP,pcm=7", "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP,pcm=8", > "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP,pcm=9". The pcm=9 indicates working HDMI audio for > plughw:NVidia,9 (or hdmi:NVidia,3). \o/ > > Note: I spent four hours trying to install nvidia binary driver before I > succeeded (thanks to Sarvatt, tjaalton, and tseliot for helping out), > and one more hour trying to install it under 3.0.0.9. > > Final conclusion: patch works as expected and no regressions found. Thanks for the testing and the feedback. I've gone ahead and applied this to Oneiric. Thanks, Leann
On 09/02/2011 07:49 PM, Leann Ogasawara wrote: > On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 17:21 +0200, David Henningsson wrote: >> On 08/31/2011 11:35 PM, Leann Ogasawara wrote: >>> On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 09:18 +0200, David Henningsson wrote: >>>> On 08/30/2011 03:48 PM, Tim Gardner wrote: >>> [...] >>>>> So, you're asking to have a patch applied that has general impact on all >>>>> platforms with an HDMI port, which by your own admission has not had >>>>> widespread testing, and has not been agreed to or fully reviewed by >>>>> upstream maintainers. >>>>> >>>>> The kernel is in Beta freeze right now. What would your call be if you >>>>> were in the same position? >>>> >>>> If I were in the same position: >>>> >>>> First and foremost, I would start with a warm, welcoming and encouraging >>>> attitude towards patches. A patch sent here, means someone not only >>>> wants to improve Linux in general, but also cares in special for Ubuntu, >>>> and has taken the time and effort to backport a patch to suit Ubuntu's >>>> particular kernel version. In this case, the patch author is a Canonical >>>> employee so this is not surprising, but nevertheless, this is a really >>>> good thing and should be encouraged. >>> >>> Let me just start by saying that we really appreciate all the work that >>> you've done with regards to the audio subsystem. Your interaction with >>> upstream and the bug fixes you've provided for Ubuntu have been much >>> appreciated and I encourage you to keep up the good work. >>> >>>> With that positive attitude in mind, I would do a review. The review >>>> would, of course, take regression risk into account - a kernel bug can >>>> cause the system to fail in the most horrifying ways - but also weigh >>>> that against the possible positive outcomes of applying the patch, i e >>>> why it's needed in the first place. If I'm not qualified to make a >>>> review, I would find someone who is, to make the opinion for me. >>> >>> Because we do consider you one of our knowledge experts in the audio >>> area, I believe Tim was wanting a bit more reassurance and confidence >>> from you with regards to the patch. Having recognized the potential for >>> widespread impact, I do feel he was doing his job as one of the >>> maintainers of the Ubuntu kernel to make sure we're not introducing >>> regressions, especially being so close to Beta for Oneiric. >>> >>>> The review in this case would notice that it impacts most people with >>>> working HDMI audio which means both higher risk and gain. OTOH, the code >>>> path is simple, which means that successful testing on one machine would >>>> make it unlikely to fail on another. >>>> >>>> If I'm still unsure of regressions even after having done the review, I >>>> would make sure testing of the patch is done. If I have time, I do the >>>> testing myself, or if I don't, ask for someone to test it for me, but do >>>> what I can to help, e g by building a test kernel and provide >>>> instructions as of how to do the test. If testing with positive result >>>> is all that's needed before applying the patch, I would communicate that >>>> clearly, among with a deadline explaining when the testing must be >>>> completed. >>> >>> I've built a test kernel with your patch applied and placed it at the >>> following location: >>> >>> http://people.canonical.com/~ogasawara/diwic/ >>> >>> If you can, could you please test and confirm this resolves the issue at >>> hand and also doesn't introduce any regressions on a few existing >>> systems with working HDMI audio (whatever access to systems you have on >>> hand would suffice). Please keep in mind that Oneiric Kernel Freeze is >>> Thurs Sept 15, so if I could get your feedback before then I'd be happy >>> to try and get this applied before we hit the freeze date. >> >> Hi Leann and thank you for your kind words and clear instructions! :-) >> >> Here are the testing results (where 3.0.0-10 means your patched and >> built test kernel installed, and 3.0.0-9 is what comes with 11.10 beta 1) : >> >> Radeon HD 4200 series: >> >> 3.0.0-9, radeon driver: no jack input device, no working HDMI audio. >> 3.0.0-10, radeon driver: no jack input device, no working HDMI audio. >> 3.0.0-9, fglrx driver: no jack input device, working HDMI audio. >> 3.0.0-10, fglrx driver: no jack input device, working HDMI audio. >> >> Note: Since there is no jack input device, the code path is not run and >> my patch does not make any difference. Might look into that later (why >> there isn't a jack input device), but that is not on top of the priority >> list ATM. >> >> Intel Arrandale: >> >> 3.0.0-9: one jack input device "HDA Intel HDMI/DP" (plugin working, >> unplug does not work), working HDMI audio. >> 3.0.0-10: one jack input device "HDA Intel HDMI/DP,pcm=3" (plugin >> working but compiz crashed at one point, unplug does not work), working >> HDMI audio. >> >> Note: Patch working as jack input device name changes successfully. The >> compiz crash (reported as bug 839468) was a little strange, so I retried >> but could not reproduce the crash under either kernel. I don't think it >> has anything to do with the HDMI audio patch. >> >> Nvidia GT 430: >> >> 3.0.0-9, nouveau driver: four jack input devices "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP" >> (none of them working), no working HDMI audio on any of the four PCMs. >> 3.0.0-10, nouveau driver: four jack input devices "HDA NVidia >> HDMI/DP,pcm=3", "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP,pcm=7", "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP,pcm=8", >> "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP,pcm=9" (none of them working), no working HDMI audio >> on any of the four PCMs. >> 3.0.0-10, nvidia driver: four jack input devices "HDA NVidia >> HDMI/DP,pcm=3", "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP,pcm=7", "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP,pcm=8", >> "HDA NVidia HDMI/DP,pcm=9". The pcm=9 indicates working HDMI audio for >> plughw:NVidia,9 (or hdmi:NVidia,3). \o/ >> >> Note: I spent four hours trying to install nvidia binary driver before I >> succeeded (thanks to Sarvatt, tjaalton, and tseliot for helping out), >> and one more hour trying to install it under 3.0.0.9. >> >> Final conclusion: patch works as expected and no regressions found. > > Thanks for the testing and the feedback. I've gone ahead and applied > this to Oneiric. Thanks! I saw you released it as well, excellent :-)
On 08/29/2011 04:52 PM, David Henningsson wrote: > Upstream status for this patch is that Takashi went on vacation before > he commented on the patch, and might not return before kernel freeze. > > Anyway, it's needed for jack detection for HDMI to work. So I'd be happy > if we could apply this for Oneiric (the jack detection patches are > distro patches anyway), and then I'll have plenty of time to sort out > with Takashi what to do for P. FYI, a corresponding patch has now been committed for 3.2 [1], so this patch can be dropped in the P cycle (assuming that release will run 3.2 or later).
From 658c18c6c7f232fe5ed18d93aeaa7fd7329a31c0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: David Henningsson <david.henningsson@canonical.com> Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 16:43:31 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] ALSA: HDA: hdmi: Emit pcm device index for jack input devices Needed for userspace to be able to match pcm devices and jack input devices. Backport for kernel v3.0. Signed-off-by: David Henningsson <david.henningsson@canonical.com> --- sound/pci/hda/patch_hdmi.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/sound/pci/hda/patch_hdmi.c b/sound/pci/hda/patch_hdmi.c index bd0ae69..1687183 100644 --- a/sound/pci/hda/patch_hdmi.c +++ b/sound/pci/hda/patch_hdmi.c @@ -917,13 +917,6 @@ static int hdmi_add_pin(struct hda_codec *codec, hda_nid_t pin_nid) return -E2BIG; } - err = snd_hda_input_jack_add(codec, pin_nid, - SND_JACK_VIDEOOUT, NULL); - if (err < 0) - return err; - - hdmi_present_sense(codec, pin_nid, &spec->sink_eld[spec->num_pins]); - spec->pin[spec->num_pins] = pin_nid; spec->num_pins++; @@ -1088,12 +1081,42 @@ static int generic_hdmi_build_pcms(struct hda_codec *codec) return 0; } +static int generic_hdmi_build_jack(struct hda_codec *codec, int pin_idx) +{ + int err; + char hdmi_str[32]; + struct hdmi_spec *spec = codec->spec; + int pin_nid = spec->pin[pin_idx]; + int cvt_nid = spec->pin_cvt[pin_idx]; + int cvt_idx, pcmdev; + + cvt_idx = hda_node_index(spec->cvt, cvt_nid); + if (cvt_idx < 0) + return cvt_idx; + pcmdev = spec->pcm_rec[cvt_idx].device; + snprintf(hdmi_str, sizeof(hdmi_str), "HDMI/DP,pcm=%d", pcmdev); + + err = snd_hda_input_jack_add(codec, pin_nid, + SND_JACK_VIDEOOUT, pcmdev > 0 ? hdmi_str : NULL); + if (err < 0) + return err; + + hdmi_present_sense(codec, pin_nid, &spec->sink_eld[pin_idx]); + return 0; +} + static int generic_hdmi_build_controls(struct hda_codec *codec) { struct hdmi_spec *spec = codec->spec; int err; int i; + for (i = 0; i < spec->num_pins; i++) { + err = generic_hdmi_build_jack(codec, i); + if (err < 0) + return err; + } + for (i = 0; i < codec->num_pcms; i++) { err = snd_hda_create_spdif_out_ctls(codec, spec->cvt[i]); if (err < 0) -- 1.7.4.1