Hi Olivier：
On 2022/5/24 22:30, Olivier MOYSAN wrote:
Hi Tang,
On 5/24/22 03:44, tangbin wrote:
Hi Mark & Olivier：
On 2022/5/24 2:57, Mark Brown wrote:
On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 03:28:48PM +0200, Olivier MOYSAN wrote:
The current patch requires a change in the driver. Either changing STM_SAI_x_ID enums, or replacing data by a struct. For instance: struct stm32_sai_comp_data { unsigned int id; } struct stm32_sai_comp_data stm32_sai_comp_data_a = { .id = STM_SAI_A_ID; } struct of_device_id stm32_sai_sub_ids[] = { .data = &stm32_sai_comp_data_a}, }
Either approach works for me (or a revert for that matter).
Thanks for your advice, I was thoughtless.
I think change the date of STM_SAI_x_ID maybe simple. But if we don't change the id,
what about add a "#define" like the line 47:
#define STM_SAI_IS_SUB(x) ((x)->id == STM_SAI_A_ID || (x)->id == STM_SAI_B_ID)
then in the judgement, wu use:
sai->id = (uintptr_t)of_device_get_match_data(&pdev->dev);
if (!STM_SAI_IS_SUB(sai))
return -EINVAL;
if you think that's ok, I will send patch v2 for you .
If we allow null value in STM_SAI_IS_SUB(sai) check, we can miss real NULL pointer error from of_device_get_match_data().
The simplest way is to change STM_SAI_x_ID enums I think. But honnestly, I feel more comfortable to let the driver unchanged.
Oh，you are right, I am sorry.
Please forget this patch, I'm sorry to have wasted your time.
But I saw some codes is useless in the line 48 & line 49, I think we can remove it.
If you think so, I will send this patch for you.
Thanks
Tang Bin
BRs Olivier
Thanks
Tang Bin