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);
> + return ret;
> }
> } else {
> - 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).
--
Ken ar c'hentañ | ** Breizh ha Linux atav! **
Jef | http://moinejf.free.fr/
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
????{.n?+???????+%?????ݶ??w??{.n?+????{??G?????{ay?ʇڙ?,j??f???h?????????z_??(?階?ݢj"???m??????G????????????&???~???iO???z??v?^?m????????????I?
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
????{.n?+???????+%?????ݶ??w??{.n?+????{??G?????{ay?ʇڙ?,j??f???h?????????z_??(?階?ݢj"???m??????G????????????&???~???iO???z??v?^?m????????????I?
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 09:09:43AM +0000, [email protected] 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.