On 20 Nov 2013, Li.Xiubo@freescale.com wrote:
I agree. I guess the patch set 6 makes more sense. Also, you might consider adding a printk in the 'fsl_sgtl5000_probe()'. I guess that devm_snd_soc_register_card() will fail if the board is not present?
Yes, you are right. The logs: +++++++++++ vf610-sgtl5000 sound.3: ASoC: CODEC (null) not registered vf610-sgtl5000 sound.3: register soc sound card failed :-517
- ret = devm_snd_soc_register_card(&pdev->dev, &fsl_sgt1500_card);
- if (ret) {
- dev_err(&pdev->dev, "register soc sound card failed :%d\n"
"TWR-AUDIO-SGTL board required.\n",ret);return ret;- }
Especially, you can make one kernel that handles both cases w/wo TWR- AUDIO-SGTL board attached.
Yes, it looks nicer.
Well, as one log about the CODEC already exists? Should the "TWR-AUDIO-SGTL board required.\n" log is still needed here ?
I think that people will understand,
vf610-sgtl5000 sound.3: ASoC: CODEC (null) not registered vf610-sgtl5000 sound.3: TWR-AUDIO-SGTL board required.
As oppose to the typical 'dev_err()' of "register soc sound card failed :XXX". This message looks like something abnormal went wrong. At least 'dev_err()' maybe the wrong level?
With just the error code, people will have to look through code to diagnose this and may just think that something is wrong with the driver. It will be a very common case that a user will not have this board. I just think the message could be more explicit to avoid confusion. I am not sure if the numeric '-517' will always return in this case; if so, the message could be conditional.
That is just a suggestion. I know when I booted the TimeSys version of Linux and before I looked at the schematic, I didn't know why the codec failed to register and I thought I had a u-boot issue and/or the code was not working for my board.
Fwiw, Bill Pringlemeir.
PS: For those not familiar with the tower. The VF610-TWR has riser cards at the sides and different boards can be connected. The TWR-AUDIO-SGTL is another board that needs to be plugged in.