At Sun, 4 Oct 2009 11:35:21 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > > Hi Takashi, > > On Thu, 01 Oct 2009 08:52:59 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > At Wed, 30 Sep 2009 18:55:05 +0200, > > Jean Delvare wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 17:15:49 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > > > Yes, indeed I prefer NULL check because the user can know the error > > > > at the right place. I share your concern about the code addition, > > > > though :) > > > > > > > > I already made a patch below, but it's totally untested. > > > > It'd be helpful if someone can do review and build-test it. > > > > > > > > > > > > thanks, > > > > > > > > Takashi > > > > > > > > --- > > > > diff --git a/sound/aoa/codecs/tas.c b/sound/aoa/codecs/tas.c > > > > index f0ebc97..0f810c8 100644 > > > > --- a/sound/aoa/codecs/tas.c > > > > +++ b/sound/aoa/codecs/tas.c > > > > @@ -897,6 +897,10 @@ static int tas_create(struct i2c_adapter *adapter, > > > > client = i2c_new_device(adapter, &info); > > > > if (!client) > > > > return -ENODEV; > > > > + if (!client->driver) { > > > > + i2c_unregister_device(client); > > > > + return -ENODEV; > > > > + } > > > > > > > > /* > > > > * Let i2c-core delete that device on driver removal. > > > > diff --git a/sound/ppc/keywest.c b/sound/ppc/keywest.c > > > > index 835fa19..473c5a6 100644 > > > > --- a/sound/ppc/keywest.c > > > > +++ b/sound/ppc/keywest.c > > > > @@ -59,6 +59,13 @@ static int keywest_attach_adapter(struct i2c_adapter *adapter) > > > > strlcpy(info.type, "keywest", I2C_NAME_SIZE); > > > > info.addr = keywest_ctx->addr; > > > > keywest_ctx->client = i2c_new_device(adapter, &info); > > > > + if (!keywest_ctx->client) > > > > + return -ENODEV; > > > > + if (!keywest_ctx->client->driver) { > > > > + i2c_unregister_device(keywest_ctx->client); > > > > + keywest_ctx->client = NULL; > > > > + return -ENODEV; > > > > + } > > > > > > > > /* > > > > * Let i2c-core delete that device on driver removal. > > > > > > This looks good to me. Please add the following comment before the > > > client->driver check in both drivers: > > > > > > /* > > > * We know the driver is already loaded, so the device should be > > > * already bound. If not it means binding failed, and then there > > > * is no point in keeping the device instantiated. > > > */ > > > > > > Otherwise it's a little difficult to understand why the check is there. > > > > Fair enough. I applied the patch with the comment now. > > Thanks! > > I see this is upstream now. While the keywest fix was essentially > theoretical, the tas one addresses a crash which really could happen, > so I think it would be worth sending to stable for 2.6.31. What do you > think? Will you take care, or do you want me to? Agreed, it's safer to send the patch to stable tree. I'm going to submit it. thanks, Takashi _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel