Re: [PATCH v5 2/6] ASoC: sgtl5000: Improve VAG power and mute control

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2019-07-19 09:09, Oleksandr Suvorov wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 at 21:49, Cezary Rojewski <cezary.rojewski@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 2019-07-18 20:42, Cezary Rojewski wrote:
On 2019-07-18 11:02, Oleksandr Suvorov wrote:
+enum {
+    HP_POWER_EVENT,
+    DAC_POWER_EVENT,
+    ADC_POWER_EVENT,
+    LAST_POWER_EVENT
+};
+
+static u16 mute_mask[] = {
+    SGTL5000_HP_MUTE,
+    SGTL5000_OUTPUTS_MUTE,
+    SGTL5000_OUTPUTS_MUTE
+};

If mute_mask[] is only used within common handler, you may consider
declaring const array within said handler instead (did not check that
myself).
Otherwise, simple comment for the second _OUTPUTS_MUTE should suffice -
its not self explanatory why you doubled that mask.

Ok, I'll add a comment to explain doubled mask.


+
   /* sgtl5000 private structure in codec */
   struct sgtl5000_priv {
       int sysclk;    /* sysclk rate */
@@ -137,8 +157,109 @@ struct sgtl5000_priv {
       u8 micbias_voltage;
       u8 lrclk_strength;
       u8 sclk_strength;
+    u16 mute_state[LAST_POWER_EVENT];
   };

When I spoke of LAST enum constant, I did not really had this specific
usage in mind.

  From design perspective, _LAST_ does not exist and should never be
referred to as "the next option" i.e.: new enum constant.

By its nature, LAST_POWER_EVENT is actually a size of the array, but I
couldn't come up with a better name.

That is way preferred usage is:
u16 mute_state[ADC_POWER_EVENT+1;
-or-
u16 mute_state[LAST_POWER_EVENT+1];

Maybe I'm just being radical here :)

Maybe :)  I don't like first variant (ADC_POWER_EVENT+1): somewhen in
future, someone can add a new event to this enum and we've got a
possible situation with "out of array indexing".


Czarek

Forgive me for double posting. Comment above is targeted towards:

  >> +enum {
  >> +    HP_POWER_EVENT,
  >> +    DAC_POWER_EVENT,
  >> +    ADC_POWER_EVENT,
  >> +    LAST_POWER_EVENT
  >> +};

as LAST_POWER_EVENT is not assigned explicitly to ADC_POWER_EVENT and
thus generates implicit "new option" of value 3.

So will you be happy with the following variant?
...
     ADC_POWER_EVENT,
     LAST_POWER_EVENT =  ADC_POWER_EVENT,
...
    u16 mute_state[LAST_POWER_EVENT+1];
...


It's not about being happy - I'm a happy man in general ;p

As stated already, declaring _LAST_ as the "new option" is misleading and not advised.
And yeah, [_LAST_ + 1] is usually the one you should go with.

Czarek
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel



[Index of Archives]     [ALSA User]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Pulse Audio]     [Kernel Archive]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Photo Sharing]     [Linux Sound]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux