From patchwork Fri Aug 23 00:58:58 2019 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Kuninori Morimoto X-Patchwork-Id: 11110291 Return-Path: Received: from mail.kernel.org (pdx-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [172.30.200.123]) by pdx-korg-patchwork-2.web.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A69A2112C for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 01:03:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from alsa0.perex.cz (alsa0.perex.cz [77.48.224.243]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A64A23404 for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 01:03:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=alsa-project.org header.i=@alsa-project.org header.b="RuumJlLm" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 3A64A23404 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=renesas.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (alsa1.perex.cz [207.180.221.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 659E11667; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 03:02:28 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa0.perex.cz 659E11667 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=alsa-project.org; s=default; t=1566522198; bh=hEUzHzu8W5tjj4Itj/fdaE2xiGVMUWGHwmrkSoCnQRQ=; h=Date:From:To:In-Reply-To:References:Cc:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From; b=RuumJlLmJvfNrKFbP7oFmyH/IQscS7XOUgmZn06agwUO9Xb08OI9x7AkudErXl/SY rdQGB22gsskJKIj3zzCEQVcEtbzrmaVu88MhVON4iIdcxg/On7XwovDviftcuvcsRy W+tBKz520y1clNtmCjWWI8MK8SM3u4eKvE0CbDd0= Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38CEBF80636; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 02:59:08 +0200 (CEST) X-Original-To: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org Delivered-To: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org Received: by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix, from userid 50401) id 963ADF8060E; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 02:59:04 +0200 (CEST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on alsa1.perex.cz X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=disabled version=3.4.0 Received: from relmlie6.idc.renesas.com (relmlor2.renesas.com [210.160.252.172]) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id A85F7F805FC for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 02:58:58 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa1.perex.cz A85F7F805FC Date: 23 Aug 2019 09:58:58 +0900 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,419,1559487600"; d="scan'208";a="24476507" Received: from unknown (HELO relmlir5.idc.renesas.com) ([10.200.68.151]) by relmlie6.idc.renesas.com with ESMTP; 23 Aug 2019 09:58:58 +0900 Received: from morimoto-PC.renesas.com (unknown [10.166.18.140]) by relmlir5.idc.renesas.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29C26400D0FA; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 09:58:58 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <87o90g7lbd.wl-kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> From: Kuninori Morimoto User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 Emacs/24.5 Mule/6.0 To: Mark Brown In-Reply-To: <87wof47ldc.wl-kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> References: <87wof47ldc.wl-kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Cc: Linux-ALSA Subject: [alsa-devel] [PATCH 06/16] ASoC: soc-core: move soc_probe_link_components() position X-BeenThere: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Alsa-devel mailing list for ALSA developers - http://www.alsa-project.org" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: "Alsa-devel" From: Kuninori Morimoto It is easy to read code if it is cleanly using paired function/naming, like start <-> stop, register <-> unregister, etc, etc. But, current ALSA SoC code is very random, unbalance, not paired, etc. It is easy to create bug at the such code, and it will be difficult to debug. soc_probe_link_components() has paired soc_remove_link_components(), but, these are implemented at different place. So it is difficult to confirm code. This patch moves soc_probe_link_components() next to soc_remove_link_components(). Signed-off-by: Kuninori Morimoto --- sound/soc/soc-core.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++-------------------- 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) diff --git a/sound/soc/soc-core.c b/sound/soc/soc-core.c index 8e831ae..2a166ab 100644 --- a/sound/soc/soc-core.c +++ b/sound/soc/soc-core.c @@ -1135,6 +1135,26 @@ static void soc_remove_link_components(struct snd_soc_card *card, } } +static int soc_probe_link_components(struct snd_soc_card *card, + struct snd_soc_pcm_runtime *rtd, int order) +{ + struct snd_soc_component *component; + struct snd_soc_rtdcom_list *rtdcom; + int ret; + + for_each_rtdcom(rtd, rtdcom) { + component = rtdcom->component; + + if (component->driver->probe_order == order) { + ret = soc_probe_component(card, component); + if (ret < 0) + return ret; + } + } + + return 0; +} + static void soc_remove_dai_links(struct snd_soc_card *card) { int order; @@ -1379,26 +1399,6 @@ static int soc_rtd_init(struct snd_soc_pcm_runtime *rtd, const char *name) return 0; } -static int soc_probe_link_components(struct snd_soc_card *card, - struct snd_soc_pcm_runtime *rtd, int order) -{ - struct snd_soc_component *component; - struct snd_soc_rtdcom_list *rtdcom; - int ret; - - for_each_rtdcom(rtd, rtdcom) { - component = rtdcom->component; - - if (component->driver->probe_order == order) { - ret = soc_probe_component(card, component); - if (ret < 0) - return ret; - } - } - - return 0; -} - static int soc_probe_dai(struct snd_soc_dai *dai, int order) { int ret;