Hi Jiada
Thank you for your feedback
Further more, if the passed 'byte' amount to rsnd_ssi_pointer_update() is more than byte_per_period. the calculation of next_period_byte isn't correct.
Is it really happen ??
Basically, I have no objection about this patch, but this explanation is very strange for me...
No, I didn't see the issue, but the implementation of rsnd_ssi_pointer_update(), behaves like it knows all caller will always pass 'byte' no larger than byte_per_period, without any check internally.
I am ok to remove this explanation from commit message, what do you think?
This function is used from PIO mode only now, and "byte" is sizeof(u32) (Its size was "byte_per_period" when DMA mode used). This "Further more" case never happen. Removing from commit message is better for reader, IMO.
Best regards --- Kuninori Morimoto