On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 02:35:04PM +0100, Charles Keepax wrote:
> Currently DAPM has almost identical code to handle errors from
> snd_soc_dapm_new_control_unlocked in many places. Centralise
> this handling within snd_soc_dapm_new_control_unlocked and
> remove the duplicated error reporting. This also has the fringe
> benefit of removing a lot of error messages that would have
> been printed on the -ENOMEM paths.
This changelog doesn't entirely match up with the change:
> }
> - if (!data->widget) {
> - ret = -ENOMEM;
> - goto err_data;
> - }
> }
and
> w = snd_soc_dapm_new_control_unlocked(dapm, widget);
> - /* Do not nag about probe deferrals */
> - if (IS_ERR(w)) {
> - int ret = PTR_ERR(w);
> -
> - if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
> - dev_err(dapm->dev,
> - "ASoC: Failed to create DAPM control %s (%d)\n",
> - widget->name, ret);
> - goto out_unlock;
> - }
> - if (!w)
> - dev_err(dapm->dev,
> - "ASoC: Failed to create DAPM control %s\n",
> - widget->name);
> -
> -out_unlock:
> mutex_unlock(&dapm->card->dapm_mutex);
> +
> return w;
are not obviously identical.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
