Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH] ASoC: Intel: bytcr_5640.c:Refactored if statement and removed buffer | From | Hans de Goede <> | Date | Mon, 6 May 2019 17:43:16 +0200 |
| |
Hi Pierre-Louis,
Nariman and the author authors of these patches are a group of students doing some kernel work for me and this is a warm-up assignment for them to get used to the kernel development process.
On 06-05-19 17:21, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: > >> static int byt_rt5640_suspend(struct snd_soc_card *card) >> @@ -1268,28 +1266,12 @@ static int snd_byt_rt5640_mc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> log_quirks(&pdev->dev); >> if ((byt_rt5640_quirk & BYT_RT5640_SSP2_AIF2) || >> - (byt_rt5640_quirk & BYT_RT5640_SSP0_AIF2)) { >> - >> - /* fixup codec aif name */ >> - snprintf(byt_rt5640_codec_aif_name, >> - sizeof(byt_rt5640_codec_aif_name), >> - "%s", "rt5640-aif2"); >> - >> - byt_rt5640_dais[dai_index].codec_dai_name = >> - byt_rt5640_codec_aif_name; >> - } >> + (byt_rt5640_quirk & BYT_RT5640_SSP0_AIF2)) >> + byt_rt5640_dais[dai_index].codec_dai_name = "rt5640-aif2"; > > This is not equivalent, you don't deal with the (byt_rt5640_quirk & BYT_RT5640_SSP2_AIF2) case. The default is SSP_AIF1
I might be mistaken here, but look closer, the original: if ((byt_rt5640_quirk & BYT_RT5640_SSP2_AIF2) ||
Line is kept, so the new code block is:
if ((byt_rt5640_quirk & BYT_RT5640_SSP2_AIF2) || (byt_rt5640_quirk & BYT_RT5640_SSP0_AIF2)) byt_rt5640_dais[dai_index].codec_dai_name = "rt5640-aif2";
Which does take the BYT_RT5640_SSP2_AIF2 into account.
>> if ((byt_rt5640_quirk & BYT_RT5640_SSP0_AIF1) || >> - (byt_rt5640_quirk & BYT_RT5640_SSP0_AIF2)) { >> - >> - /* fixup cpu dai name name */ >> - snprintf(byt_rt5640_cpu_dai_name, >> - sizeof(byt_rt5640_cpu_dai_name), >> - "%s", "ssp0-port"); >> - >> - byt_rt5640_dais[dai_index].cpu_dai_name = >> - byt_rt5640_cpu_dai_name; >> - } >> + (byt_rt5640_quirk & BYT_RT5640_SSP0_AIF2)) >> + byt_rt5640_dais[dai_index].cpu_dai_name = "ssp0-port"; > > Same here, this is not equivalent. the SSP0_AIF1 case is not handled. > it's fine to remove the intermediate buffers, but you can't remove support for 2 out of the 4 combinations supported.
Same remark here from me too :)
Regards,
Hans
| |