linux-kernel - [PATCH v2 09/12] ASoC: doc: dapm: fix and improve section "Registering DAPM controls"

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: <20240426-dapm-docs-v2-9-87b07547eb5b@bootlin.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 18:56:42 +0200
From: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@...tlin.com>
To: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, 
 Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>, 
 Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>, 
 Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>, 
 Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>, 
 linux-sound@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, 
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@...tlin.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 09/12] ASoC: doc: dapm: fix and improve section
 "Registering DAPM controls"

Extend the first paragraph to mention the {,num_}dapm_routes fields just
like the widget conterparts. Mention the route fields also in the code
example. Fix "at build time", this really means "at probe time".

Reviewed-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
Reviewed-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@...tlin.com>
---
 Documentation/sound/soc/dapm.rst | 21 ++++++++++++++-------
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/sound/soc/dapm.rst b/Documentation/sound/soc/dapm.rst
index 4b094c3d7942..2831b00ae4e2 100644
--- a/Documentation/sound/soc/dapm.rst
+++ b/Documentation/sound/soc/dapm.rst
@@ -254,12 +254,17 @@ This can be used to merge two signal paths together in software.
 Registering DAPM controls
 =========================
 
-In many cases the DAPM widgets implemented statically in a ``static const
-struct snd_soc_dapm_widget`` array and the routes connecting them in a
-``static const struct snd_soc_dapm_route`` array in a codec driver, and
-simply declared via the ``dapm_widgets`` and ``num_dapm_widgets`` fields of
-the ``struct snd_soc_component_driver`` so the driver registration will
-take care of populating them::
+In many cases the DAPM widgets are implemented statically in a ``static
+const struct snd_soc_dapm_widget`` array in a codec driver, and simply
+declared via the ``dapm_widgets`` and ``num_dapm_widgets`` fields of the
+``struct snd_soc_component_driver``.
+
+Similarly, routes connecting them are implemented statically in a ``static
+const struct snd_soc_dapm_route`` array and declared via the
+``dapm_routes`` and ``num_dapm_routes`` fields of the same struct.
+
+With the above declared, the driver registration will take care of
+populating them::
 
   static const struct snd_soc_dapm_widget wm2000_dapm_widgets[] = {
   	SND_SOC_DAPM_OUTPUT("SPKN"),
@@ -278,11 +283,13 @@ take care of populating them::
 	...
   	.dapm_widgets		= wm2000_dapm_widgets,
   	.num_dapm_widgets	= ARRAY_SIZE(wm2000_dapm_widgets),
+  	.dapm_routes            = wm2000_audio_map,
+  	.num_dapm_routes        = ARRAY_SIZE(wm2000_audio_map),
 	...
   };
 
 In more complex cases the list of DAPM widgets and/or routes can be only
-known at build time. This happens for example when a driver supports
+known at probe time. This happens for example when a driver supports
 different models having a different set of features. In those cases
 separate widgets and routes arrays implementing the case-specific features
 can be registered programmatically by calling snd_soc_dapm_new_controls()

-- 
2.34.1