Message ID | 1414666259-4450-3-git-send-email-vinod.koul@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Accepted |
Commit | 5794b7ec62d85700d372b07d88eaf71e807f542f |
Headers | show |
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 04:20:57PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > From: Fang, Yang A <yang.a.fang@intel.com> > > The firmware name was used worngly, so fix it up Applied, thanks. I am wondering how the code was originally tested...
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 12:51:38PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 04:20:57PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > > From: Fang, Yang A <yang.a.fang@intel.com> > > > > The firmware name was used worngly, so fix it up > > Applied, thanks. I am wondering how the code was originally tested... The firmware name was not right even in the binary thats how we never caught this early on. Thanks for applying all the patches, I will updated the ACPI stuff
diff --git a/sound/soc/intel/sst/sst_loader.c b/sound/soc/intel/sst/sst_loader.c index 00f60c1..b580f96 100644 --- a/sound/soc/intel/sst/sst_loader.c +++ b/sound/soc/intel/sst/sst_loader.c @@ -344,12 +344,9 @@ void sst_firmware_load_cb(const struct firmware *fw, void *context) static int sst_request_fw(struct intel_sst_drv *sst) { int retval = 0; - char name[20]; const struct firmware *fw; - dev_dbg(sst->dev, "Requesting FW %s now...\n", name); - - retval = request_firmware(&fw, name, sst->dev); + retval = request_firmware(&fw, sst->firmware_name, sst->dev); if (fw == NULL) { dev_err(sst->dev, "fw is returning as null\n"); return -EINVAL;