On 3/27/20 3:47 PM, Amadeusz Sławiński wrote:
Functions soc_tplg_denum_create, soc_tplg_dmixer_create,
soc_tplg_dbytes_create can fail, so their return values should be
checked and error should be propagated.
Signed-off-by: Amadeusz Sławiński <amadeuszx.slawinski@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
v2:
Added this patch
sound/soc/soc-topology.c | 18 ++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/sound/soc/soc-topology.c b/sound/soc/soc-topology.c
index c3811dd66b68..860bced933d6 100644
--- a/sound/soc/soc-topology.c
+++ b/sound/soc/soc-topology.c
@@ -1124,6 +1124,7 @@ static int soc_tplg_kcontrol_elems_load(struct soc_tplg *tplg,
struct snd_soc_tplg_hdr *hdr)
{
struct snd_soc_tplg_ctl_hdr *control_hdr;
+ int ret;
int i;
if (tplg->pass != SOC_TPLG_PASS_MIXER) {
@@ -1152,25 +1153,30 @@ static int soc_tplg_kcontrol_elems_load(struct soc_tplg *tplg,
case SND_SOC_TPLG_CTL_RANGE:
case SND_SOC_TPLG_DAPM_CTL_VOLSW:
case SND_SOC_TPLG_DAPM_CTL_PIN:
- soc_tplg_dmixer_create(tplg, 1,
- le32_to_cpu(hdr->payload_size));
+ ret = soc_tplg_dmixer_create(tplg, 1,
+ le32_to_cpu(hdr->payload_size));
break;
case SND_SOC_TPLG_CTL_ENUM:
case SND_SOC_TPLG_CTL_ENUM_VALUE:
case SND_SOC_TPLG_DAPM_CTL_ENUM_DOUBLE:
case SND_SOC_TPLG_DAPM_CTL_ENUM_VIRT:
case SND_SOC_TPLG_DAPM_CTL_ENUM_VALUE:
- soc_tplg_denum_create(tplg, 1,
- le32_to_cpu(hdr->payload_size));
+ ret = soc_tplg_denum_create(tplg, 1,
+ le32_to_cpu(hdr->payload_size));
break;
case SND_SOC_TPLG_CTL_BYTES:
- soc_tplg_dbytes_create(tplg, 1,
- le32_to_cpu(hdr->payload_size));
+ ret = soc_tplg_dbytes_create(tplg, 1,
+ le32_to_cpu(hdr->payload_size));
break;
default:
soc_bind_err(tplg, control_hdr, i);
return -EINVAL;
}
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(tplg->dev, "ASoC: invalid control\n");
+ return ret;
+ }
Sounds good, but this happens in a loop, so would all the memory
previously allocated by denum/dbytes/dmixer_create leak, or is it freed
automatically somewhere else?
+
}
return 0;
