linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] ASoC: wm_adsp: Add code_probe and codec

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]

Date:	Tue, 9 Jun 2015 17:43:29 +0100
From:	Richard Fitzgerald <rf@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:	lgirdwood@...il.com, patches@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com,
	alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] ASoC: wm_adsp: Add code_probe and codec_remove
	stubs

On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 05:20:45PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 05:13:56PM +0100, Richard Fitzgerald wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 05:00:43PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
> > > I'm still not a big fan of the double registration that's being done -
> > > if nothing else the fact that it's not also factoring out the creation
> > > of the DSP controls seems wrong.
> 

We can certainly look at factoring out that control creation once we have
a probe function in wm_adsp to put them in. Which is what this patch creates.

> > I don't see the point of trying to fight against the design of ASoC with
> > the second probe. ASoC gives us what we need at the codec_probe stage
> > so why try to invent something different?
> 
> Well, you could've still hung things off the struct device - it's not
> like the ASoC level device is a requirement here - and like I say the

I'm doing it in the codec_probe because by that time ASoC has created its
codec: debugfs node and I can put the dsp debugfs nodes under that. If I
created the debugfs earlier before ASoC has probed the codec that node
won't exist so I'd have to create my own debugfs node, and it seems a bit
odd and untidy to have some codec debug info under the asoc node but some
stuff somewhere else.

> fact that it's not actually factoring out the initialisation that's
> already happening at the ASoC probe isn't good.


--
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/