Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH] ASoC: simple-card: fix one bug to writing to the platform data
Xiubo Li wrote:
It's a bug that writing to the platform data directly, for it should be constant. So just copy it before writing.
Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <Li.Xiubo at freescale.com>
sound/soc/generic/simple-card.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
diff --git a/sound/soc/generic/simple-card.c b/sound/soc/generic/simple-card.c index 406e4ea..5b65324 100644 --- a/sound/soc/generic/simple-card.c +++ b/sound/soc/generic/simple-card.c
[snip]
@@ -204,36 +205,37 @@ static int asoc_simple_card_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) struct device_node *np = pdev->dev.of_node; struct device_node *of_cpu, *of_codec, *of_platform; struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
int ret;
cinfo = NULL; of_cpu = NULL; of_codec = NULL; of_platform = NULL;
cinfo = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*cinfo), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!cinfo)
return -ENOMEM;
if (np && of_device_is_available(np)) {
cinfo = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*cinfo), GFP_KERNEL);
if (cinfo) {
int ret;
cinfo->snd_card.dev = &pdev->dev;
ret = asoc_simple_card_parse_of(np, cinfo, dev,
&of_cpu,
&of_codec,
&of_platform);
if (ret < 0) {
if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
dev_err(dev, "parse error %d\n", ret);
return ret;
}
} else {
return -ENOMEM;
cinfo->snd_card.dev = dev;
ret = asoc_simple_card_parse_of(np, cinfo, dev,
&of_cpu,
&of_codec,
&of_platform);
if (ret < 0) {
if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
dev_err(dev, "parse error %d\n", ret);
} } else {return ret;
cinfo = pdev->dev.platform_data;
if (!cinfo) {
}if (!pdev->dev.platform_data) { dev_err(dev, "no info for asoc-simple-card\n"); return -EINVAL;
cinfo->snd_card.dev = &pdev->dev;
memcpy(cinfo, pdev->dev.platform_data, sizeof(cinfo));
cinfo->snd_card.dev = dev;
}
if (!cinfo->name ||
If the original cinfo is not used anymore, the use of its structure to handle the card information is not a good idea:
- almost all cinfo information are in the struct snd_soc_card,
- this cinfo structure cannot be extended to handle many DAI links,
- it contains simple-card information which are of no use for the platform caller.
So, I'd rather have seen:
- the removal of 'snd_link' and 'snd_card' from the platform interface (struct asoc_simple_card_info),
- the definition of a local struct simple_card_data containing the struct snd_soc_card and a pointer to an array of fmt/sysclk values (one per DAI link).
Hi Jean-Francois,
If the original cinfo is not used anymore, the use of its structure to handle the card information is not a good idea:
almost all cinfo information are in the struct snd_soc_card,
this cinfo structure cannot be extended to handle many DAI links,
it contains simple-card information which are of no use for the platform caller.
So, I'd rather have seen:
the removal of 'snd_link' and 'snd_card' from the platform interface (struct asoc_simple_card_info),
the definition of a local struct simple_card_data containing the struct snd_soc_card and a pointer to an array of fmt/sysclk values (one per DAI link).
I have sent one patch to fix some of these and mainly fixed the bug from Mark's comments in another early email.
Thanks,
-- Best Regards, Xiubo
Hi Mark, Jean-Francios
If the original cinfo is not used anymore, the use of its structure to handle the card information is not a good idea:
almost all cinfo information are in the struct snd_soc_card,
this cinfo structure cannot be extended to handle many DAI links,
it contains simple-card information which are of no use for the platform caller.
So, I'd rather have seen:
the removal of 'snd_link' and 'snd_card' from the platform interface (struct asoc_simple_card_info),
the definition of a local struct simple_card_data containing the struct snd_soc_card and a pointer to an array of fmt/sysclk values (one per DAI link).
@Jean-Francios, apart from this separate issue we're discussing, do you have any comment on this patch itself?
@Mark, Since what Jean-Francios is concerned by is another issue apart from this patch itself and being discussed, can you apply the patch?
Thanks,
-- Best Regards, Xiubo
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 09:09:43AM +0000, Li.Xiubo@freescale.com wrote:
@Mark, Since what Jean-Francios is concerned by is another issue apart from this patch itself and being discussed, can you apply the patch?
I thought I'd already applied it but if I didn't you'll need to resend.
participants (3)
-
Jean-Francois Moine
-
Li.Xiubo@freescale.com
-
Mark Brown