On Thu, Oct 08, 2020 at 06:05:39PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > My main concern is what was the idea behind? Does it mean we support optional > DMA in such case? If now, why not to return an error code directly? ... > no idea, the code has been this way since 2013 > (5eda87b890f867b098e5566b5543642851e8b9c3) That's "ASoC: dmaengine: support deferred probe for DMA channels" for those playing at home. It's been that way since before then since previously we ignored errors entirely. > It's worth asking the question on the mailing list, I don't know if this is a > bug or a feature. I'm fairly sure it's intentional for systems with limited DMA channels available but ICBW, it's obviously been quite some time. In retrospect a comment explaining the decision would have been a good idea.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
