if (tplg->pass != SOC_TPLG_PASS_MIXER) { @@ -1152,25 +1153,30 @@ static int soc_tplg_kcontrol_elems_load(struct soc_tplg *tplg, case SND_SOC_TPLG_CTL_RANGE: case SND_SOC_TPLG_DAPM_CTL_VOLSW: case SND_SOC_TPLG_DAPM_CTL_PIN: - soc_tplg_dmixer_create(tplg, 1, - le32_to_cpu(hdr->payload_size)); + ret = soc_tplg_dmixer_create(tplg, 1, + le32_to_cpu(hdr->payload_size)); break; case SND_SOC_TPLG_CTL_ENUM: case SND_SOC_TPLG_CTL_ENUM_VALUE: case SND_SOC_TPLG_DAPM_CTL_ENUM_DOUBLE: case SND_SOC_TPLG_DAPM_CTL_ENUM_VIRT: case SND_SOC_TPLG_DAPM_CTL_ENUM_VALUE: - soc_tplg_denum_create(tplg, 1, - le32_to_cpu(hdr->payload_size)); + ret = soc_tplg_denum_create(tplg, 1, + le32_to_cpu(hdr->payload_size)); break; case SND_SOC_TPLG_CTL_BYTES: - soc_tplg_dbytes_create(tplg, 1, - le32_to_cpu(hdr->payload_size)); + ret = soc_tplg_dbytes_create(tplg, 1, + le32_to_cpu(hdr->payload_size)); break; default: soc_bind_err(tplg, control_hdr, i); return -EINVAL; } + if (ret < 0) { + dev_err(tplg->dev, "ASoC: invalid control\n"); + return ret; + }
Sounds good, but this happens in a loop, so would all the memory previously allocated by denum/dbytes/dmixer_create leak, or is it freed automatically somewhere else?
Well, now that error is propagated, snd_soc_tplg_component_remove() should be called by snd_soc_tplg_component_load() in case of errors while parsing. From quick look it seems like it should be able to free it up correctly by calling remove_enum/bytes/mixer.
I am not sure what you meant by 'should be called', if it's a recommendation for a future change or a description of the existing behavior. Just to be clear, are you saying the existing code will take care of this error flow or that a new patch is needed?