On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 09:34:37AM +0000, Dimitris Papastamos wrote: > On Thu, 2010-11-04 at 14:31 -0400, Mark Brown wrote: > > > + mutex_init(&cache_rw_mutex); > > > + > > I'd kind of expect this to be with the other cache setup? > Do you mean that the mutex should also be used with the other caching > techniques? That is not needed because we currently lock at a higher > level, in the function that delegates the calls to the implementation > functions. I'd expect this to be with the rest of the initialisation for the structure that it's embedded in - having this be initialised in this place separately to anything else feels wrong. Of course at the minute it's not in a structure (which I raised as an issue as well IIRC) which means that we'll have an issue with multiple initialisation if two devices are registered. > > Are you sure that all the CODECs that rely on the existing shared > > register cache are going to call this? > What do you mean by 'shared register cache'? Each codec gets its own > copy of their register cache. The shared register cache support code. > Any CODEC driver that calls snd_soc_register_codec() and has provided > reg_cache_size and reg_word_size will have soc-core setting up its cache > accordingly. By default the provided snd_soc_codec_driver is zero-ed > out, so its compress_type will default to the flat compression type. Are you absolutely positive that every user of the code is using a register cache initialised using that method? _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
