On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 8:21 PM Kuninori Morimoto <
kuninori.morimoto.gx@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Ranjani
>
> Thank you for your review.
>
> > > +static int soc_dai_link_sanity_check(struct snd_soc_card *card,
> > > + struct snd_soc_dai_link *link)
> > > {
> > > int i;
> > > struct snd_soc_dai_link_component *codec, *platform;
> > > @@ -1043,11 +1043,15 @@ static int soc_bind_dai_link(struct
> > > snd_soc_card *card,
> > > struct snd_soc_pcm_runtime *rtd;
> > > struct snd_soc_dai_link_component *codec, *platform;
> > > struct snd_soc_component *component;
> > > - int i;
> > > + int i, ret;
> > >
> > > if (dai_link->ignore)
> > > return 0;
> > >
> > > + ret = soc_dai_link_sanity_check(card, dai_link);
> > > + if (ret < 0)
> > > + return ret;
> > Morimoto-san,
> >
> > Should this be done after checking if soc_is_dai_link_bound() maybe?
>
Morimoto-san,
I thought about this a bit more. With you changes in the series to move
bind_dai_link() to snd_soc_add_dai(), is the check
for soc_is_dai_link_bound() needed at all?
Thanks,
Ranjani
>
> Hmm... maybe
> Thanks. I will fixit in v3
>
> Thank you for your help !!
> Best regards
> ---
> Kuninori Morimoto
> _______________________________________________
> Alsa-devel mailing list
> Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
>
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
