linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ASoC: simple-card: simplify code

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140114171258.2d027ee5@armhf>
Date:	Tue, 14 Jan 2014 17:12:58 +0100
From:	Jean-Francois Moine <moinejf@...e.fr>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:	lgirdwood@...il.com, Xiubo Li <Li.Xiubo@...escale.com>,
	alsa-devel@...a-project.org, kuninori.morimoto.gx@...esas.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: simple-card: simplify code

On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 14:20:14 +0000
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 12:36:06PM +0100, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
> > This patch
> > - removes the fields of the platform data which are of no use to the
> >   non-DT platform callers,
> > - uses a new private structure to handle all the sound card information,
> > - simplifies the code and make easier a possible multi-DAI links extension.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jean-Francois Moine <moinejf@...e.fr>
> > ---
> > Xiubo, I also removed 'of_device_is_available' which seems really
> > useless: the module is not probed when the DT status is not "okay".
> 
> Please send this as a patch series to aid review, one patch doing four
> different changes is much harder to review.

As there are other bugs to fix, I may put back the 'of_device_is_available',
but there are not 3 different changes: I just explain the visible
effects of the patch. The patch itself is, as the subject says,
'simplify code', that is, 'have a simpler code with no change in the
logic'.

> >  		ret = asoc_simple_card_sub_parse_of(np,
> > -						  &info->cpu_dai,
> > -						  of_cpu);
> > +						  &priv->cpu_dai,
> > +					  (struct device_node **)
> > +						  &dai_link->cpu_of_node,
> > +						  &dai_link->cpu_dai_name);
> 
> 
> What's this cast here for?  That code doesn't look at all safe.

dai_link->cpu_of_node is 'const struct device_node *' and both
of_clk_get() and of_node_put() want 'struct device_node *'. So, there
must be a cast somewhere.

Do you prefer I put these ones when calling the 'of_xx' functions?

-- 
Ken ar c'hentañ	|	      ** Breizh ha Linux atav! **
Jef		|		http://moinejf.free.fr/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/