On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 04:48:26PM +0100, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 11/19/2016 04:45 PM, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> > On 11/19/2016 04:42 PM, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> >> On 11/19/2016 03:48 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> [...]
> >>> @@ -206,15 +204,10 @@ static int __init smdk_audio_init(void)
> >>> int ret;
> >>> char *str;
> >>>
> >>> - if (machine_is_smdkc100()
> >>> - || machine_is_smdkv210() || machine_is_smdkc110()) {
> >>> - smdk.num_links = 3;
> >>> - } else if (machine_is_smdk6410()) {
> >>> - str = (char *)smdk_dai[PRI_PLAYBACK].cpu_dai_name;
> >>> - str[strlen(str) - 1] = '2';
> >>> - str = (char *)smdk_dai[PRI_CAPTURE].cpu_dai_name;
> >>> - str[strlen(str) - 1] = '2';
> >>> - }
> >>> + str = (char *)smdk_dai[PRI_PLAYBACK].cpu_dai_name;
> >>> + str[strlen(str) - 1] = '2';
> >>> + str = (char *)smdk_dai[PRI_CAPTURE].cpu_dai_name;
> >>> + str[strlen(str) - 1] = '2';
> >>
> >> This could be further simplified by just updating the initial cpu_dai_name
> >> string in the dai_link struct.
> >>
> >> Especially considering that the cpu_dai_name is a string literal and the ARM
> >> kernel now has rodata write protection enabled by default, so modifying it
> >> will crash the kernel.
> >
> > Spoke too soon, you fix this up in the next patch. But I'd just squash that
> > change into this patch. I think it is pretty safe to assume that it is correct.
Yes, I wanted to split trivial change from something which would be nice
to test (I did not test it). However you're right that logically this is
the same change.
> And another thing. Since num_links is always 2 now the last entry from the
> smdk_dai array can be removed and num_links can be initialized using
> ARRAY_SIZE().
Ahh, indeed. The third DAI link (SEC_PLAYBACK) could be removed now.
Thanks for feedback,
Krzysztof
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
