[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ed0f6c49-8e39-4cc6-ba93-35a9372bb532@tuxon.dev>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 11:56:39 +0200
From: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...on.dev>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: mturquette@...libre.com, sboyd@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org,
krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org, biju.das.jz@...renesas.com,
prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@...renesas.com, lgirdwood@...il.com,
broonie@...nel.org, magnus.damm@...il.com, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
perex@...ex.cz, tiwai@...e.com, p.zabel@...gutronix.de,
linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-sound@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea.uj@...renesas.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 14/25] ASoC: renesas: rz-ssi: Use goto label names that
specify their actions
Hi, Geert,
On 09.12.2024 15:51, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Inside this block there are several return statements.
> As we know DMA is not available when we get here, these do not
> need to call rz_ssi_release_dma_channels() hence do not use
> "goto err_release_dma_chs".
> However, this may be missed when making future changes.
> So perhaps it may be prudent to make this safer, by moving this inside
> the failure branch of the rz_ssi_dma_request() check above?
I agree! As this series is already big enough I would prefer to handle it
after it is integrated. Keeping it like this doesn't impact the RZ/G3S support.
Are you OK with this approach?
Thank you for your review,
Claudiu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists