On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 12:39 AM Pierre-Louis Bossart pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com wrote:
On 2/8/21 2:12 AM, Shengjiu Wang wrote:
This log message should be a debug message, because it doesn't return directly but continue next loop.
Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang shengjiu.wang@nxp.com
sound/soc/soc-pcm.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/sound/soc/soc-pcm.c b/sound/soc/soc-pcm.c index 605acec48971..cd9e919d7b99 100644 --- a/sound/soc/soc-pcm.c +++ b/sound/soc/soc-pcm.c @@ -1344,8 +1344,8 @@ static int dpcm_add_paths(struct snd_soc_pcm_runtime *fe, int stream, /* is there a valid BE rtd for this widget */ be = dpcm_get_be(card, widget, stream); if (!be) {
dev_err(fe->dev, "ASoC: no BE found for %s\n",widget->name);
dev_dbg(fe->dev, "ASoC: no BE found for %s\n",widget->name);Do we really want to do this?
This error message has historically been the means by which we detect that userspace didn't set the right mixers (e.g. on Intel Baytrail) or the topology was incorrect. And it's really an error in the sense that you will not get audio in or out.
If you demote this to dev_dbg, we'll have to ask every single user who reports 'sound is broken' to enable dynamic debug traces. I really don't see the benefit, this is a clear case of 'fail big and fail early', partly concealing the problem doesn't make it go away but harder to diagnose.
Thanks for the explanation, it seems I misunderstood this error message.
Best regards Wang shengjiu