[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ee87d4bb-3f35-eb27-0112-e6e64a09a279@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 09:46:34 -0500
From: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
To: Cezary Rojewski <cezary.rojewski@...el.com>
Cc: alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
tiwai@...e.de, broonie@...nel.org, vkoul@...nel.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, jank@...ence.com,
srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org, slawomir.blauciak@...el.com,
Sanyog Kale <sanyog.r.kale@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [RFC PATCH 31/40] soundwire: intel: move shutdown()
callback and don't export symbol
On 7/26/19 5:38 AM, Cezary Rojewski wrote:
> On 2019-07-26 01:40, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>> +void intel_shutdown(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream,
>> + struct snd_soc_dai *dai)
>> +{
>> + struct sdw_cdns_dma_data *dma;
>> +
>> + dma = snd_soc_dai_get_dma_data(dai, substream);
>> + if (!dma)
>> + return;
>> +
>> + snd_soc_dai_set_dma_data(dai, substream, NULL);
>> + kfree(dma);
>> +}
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but do we really need to _get_dma_ here?
> _set_dma_ seems bulletproof, same for kfree.
I must admit I have no idea why we have a reference to DMAs here, this
looks like an abuse to store a dai-specific context, and the initial
test looks like copy-paste to detect invalid configs, as done in other
callbacks. Vinod and Sanyog might have more history than me here.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists