[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191009163535.GK2036@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 17:35:35 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>
Cc: spapothi@...eaurora.org, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lgirdwood@...il.com,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, vkoul@...nel.org,
pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] ASoC: codecs: add wsa881x amplifier support
On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 09:51:08AM +0100, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
> +static const u8 wsa881x_reg_readable[WSA881X_CACHE_SIZE] = {
> +static bool wsa881x_readable_register(struct device *dev, unsigned int reg)
> +{
> + return wsa881x_reg_readable[reg];
u
There's no bounds check and that array size is not...
> +static struct regmap_config wsa881x_regmap_config = {
> + .reg_bits = 32,
> + .val_bits = 8,
> + .cache_type = REGCACHE_RBTREE,
> + .reg_defaults = wsa881x_defaults,
> + .num_reg_defaults = ARRAY_SIZE(wsa881x_defaults),
> + .max_register = WSA881X_MAX_REGISTER,
...what regmap has as max_register. Uusually you'd render as a
switch statement (as you did for volatile) and let the compiler
figure out a sensible way to do the lookup.
> +static void wsa881x_init(struct wsa881x_priv *wsa881x)
> +{
> + struct regmap *rm = wsa881x->regmap;
> + unsigned int val = 0;
> +
> + regmap_read(rm, WSA881X_CHIP_ID1, &wsa881x->version);
> + regcache_cache_only(rm, true);
> + regmap_multi_reg_write(rm, wsa881x_rev_2_0,
> + ARRAY_SIZE(wsa881x_rev_2_0));
> + regcache_cache_only(rm, false);
This looks broken, what is it supposed to be doing? It looks
like it should be a register patch but it's not documented.
> +static const struct snd_kcontrol_new wsa881x_snd_controls[] = {
> + SOC_ENUM("Smart Boost Level", smart_boost_lvl_enum),
> + WSA881X_PA_GAIN_TLV("PA Gain", WSA881X_SPKR_DRV_GAIN,
> + 4, 0xC, 1, pa_gain),
As covered in control-names.rst all volume controls should end in
Volume.
> +static void wsa881x_clk_ctrl(struct snd_soc_component *comp, bool enable)
> +{
> + struct wsa881x_priv *wsa881x = snd_soc_component_get_drvdata(comp);
> +
> + mutex_lock(&wsa881x->res_lock);
What is this lock supposed to be protecting? As far as I can
tell this function is the only place it is used and this function
has exactly one caller which itself has only one caller which is
a DAPM widget and hence needs no locking. It looks awfully like
it should just be a widget itself, or inlined into the single
caller.
> +static void wsa881x_bandgap_ctrl(struct snd_soc_component *comp, bool enable)
> +{
> + struct wsa881x_priv *wsa881x = snd_soc_component_get_drvdata(comp);
Similarly here.
> +static int32_t wsa881x_resource_acquire(struct snd_soc_component *comp,
> + bool enable)
> +{
> + wsa881x_clk_ctrl(comp, enable);
> + wsa881x_bandgap_ctrl(comp, enable);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
There's no corresponding disables.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists