At Tue, 18 Nov 2003 21:16:44 -0800 (PST), Itay Ben-Yaacov wrote: > > > As I reported earlier, intel8x0 fails to resume properly on my Dell I8200 with alsa > >= 0.9.7 > > This is due to the fact that snd_intel8x0_ich_chip_init() no longer waits that extra > 1/4 second it > used to in 0.9.6 and ealier. It seems to believe that all the codecs are ready, but > apparently > they are not. > > I tried to look into this a bit further and found that: > In intel8x0_resume() there are two ac97 codecs actually resumed on my machine (I > suppose that > these are precisely the primary and secondary ones that snd_intel8x0_ich_chip_init() > has waited > for already), indexed 0 and 1. > > When resuming ac97 no. 0, in snd_ac97_resume() there are quite a few registers that > do not get set > properly. For example, here's a bit of my debugging messages: > > Nov 18 23:58:24 pisica kernel: PEZZ: bad register 2: c0c 8000 > Nov 18 23:58:24 pisica kernel: PEZZ: bad register 6: 801f 8000 > Nov 18 23:58:24 pisica kernel: PEZZ: bad register a: 801e 0 > Nov 18 23:58:24 pisica kernel: PEZZ: bad register c: 801f 8008 > Nov 18 23:58:24 pisica kernel: PEZZ: bad register e: 801f 8008 > Nov 18 23:58:24 pisica kernel: PEZZ: bad register 10: 9f1f 8808 > Nov 18 23:58:24 pisica kernel: PEZZ: bad register 12: 9f1f 8808 > Nov 18 23:58:24 pisica kernel: PEZZ: bad register 14: 9f1f 8808 > Nov 18 23:58:24 pisica kernel: PEZZ: bad register 16: 9f1f 8808 > Nov 18 23:58:24 pisica kernel: PEZZ: bad register 18: 1010 8808 > Nov 18 23:58:24 pisica kernel: PEZZ: bad register 1c: 0 8000 > Nov 18 23:58:24 pisica kernel: PEZZ: bad register 1e: 0 8000 > > The first value is the one read from the register after writing into it, the second > is what was > written.
hmm, i guess in reverse, the left is the value written and the right is the value read ? > > On the other hand, if I just add a hard-coded 1/4 second wait before > snd_ac97_resume(), emulating > the good old days, I only get: > > Nov 19 00:00:26 pisica kernel: PEZZ: bad register 2a: 9 209 > > And the sound resumes fine. > > The other ac97, indexed 1, seems to be indifferent to whether I resume it with or > without such a > delay. > > So I believe the problem is that codec no. 0 is not waited for properly, even though > it reports to > be ready... Could that be? yes, it's likely. could you try the attached patch? it's to cvs but of course applicable to the new 1.0.0-pre1, too. also, i'd like to ask you to test 1.0.0-pre1, because we have clean up the handling of multiple codecs of intel8x0 driver, but it's not tested well. please check whether it works for you. thanks, Takashi
ad18xx-resume-fix.dif
Description: Binary data
